Not a popular word around here, but *whispers* podcasting! I used to listen to the radio a lot. I was actually a DJ for a few years. Now I fill that need with podcasts. I have talk in the morning for my commute and music shows during work. It's an opportunity to hear new music. Better still, the music I find is RIAA-free which means I can buy it with a clean conscience (and I do).
My car doesn't have wi-fi, but it does have an Mp3 player that can sync podcasts. Advantage podcasts there too.
The biggest problem with the podcasting concept is that *anyone* can do it. It's hard at first to tell the wheat from the chaff. This is however the necessary price of variety. Commercial radio is of uniform (mediocre) quality. Many podcasts are worse, some (enough, I'd say) are better.
Podcasts might not be a 24/7 stream, but I've found that there's more good content than I have time to listen to. That's close enough for me.
Are the AIDS researchers dependent upon Windows software? Would foreign aid workers abroad benefit from sophisticated web applications? What have been the precise productivity costs in research and direct aid as a result of the gap between MS progress and the progress of a hypothetical free market?
Technology is the force that will result in long-term viable solutions to problems such as world hunger and healthcare. My degree is in neuroscience - a field that depends largely upon computer models and devices for things like fMRI imaging. Those are the tools of our research, the mechanisms by which things like Alzheimers, cancer, epilepsy and more are being investigated and treated. Advances in those tools will enable advances in research. Take this example. Chemsists are needed in order to figure out why people die when exposed to certain chemicals. What's more helpful: donating tons of money to an alchemist, or inventing, perfecting and selling the microscope?
Presumably, those involved in direct aid (as opposed to lab research developing solutions) would also benefit organizationally from a modern technology boom. That's not my field so I can't really speak any more to that.
Anyway, that's all a little off the original topic. Of course researchers and aid workers need money now. That's not the point. The point is that Microsoft has resulted in a net reduction in economic and technological power as compared to likely alternatives. I posit that that net reduction far exceeds any donation that Gates could possibly make.
Strange as it seems, funding is the easy (well, easier) part. Devloping the technology that will allow for 6 billion people to be fed and kept healthy is a much more daunting task. We're better off in this aspect with MS than without them, but we'd almost certainly be better off with a competitive market driving innovation forward. A healthy tech industry would generate more wealth worldwide than Gates can give.
You would rather that Microsoft scrape billions from businesses and individuals who are forced to use their software just because Gates donates some small fraction of those ill-gotten gains?
Why not just keep your money, spend it on a product that costs you less and doesn't cost the US billions annually in security flaws and upgrade costs and donate the rest?
Speaking more generally, Microsoft's dominance has slowed tech innovation (80% of internet users still stuck on 5-year old browsers for instance, but that's the tip of the iceberg) and costs its users billions annually. There is no way of knowing what exact cost Microsoft has had for the world in terms of productivity, technological progress and "TCO." The number however must be enormous. Certainly some portion of the deficit between a world without MS and a world with MS could be used to promote humanity?
*Yes, I know that MS has made numerous advances in computing. That's not the point. The point is that a competitive market would have been much more productive even than MS has been. The difference between those two overall values is the "opportunity cost" of allowing MS to hold us back.
Easy, Don't run as ADMINISTRATOR. Run as a regular user!!!!!!!
Come on, man. It's 2006 already
1. It's not 2006. =)
2. *nix types have had admin and least-rights users for decades.
3. MS could make this easier by allowing "sudo" style escalation like OS X and Ubuntu do. As it stands now, commercial software frequently creates problems for users who are doing the right thing and running as least-rights users.
Maybe we've all used VS since before.NET was even a color-coded buzzword on some PR troll's whiteboard in Redmond and we simply *assumed* that any professional developer declaring the mess to be the best IDE ever *must* be joking?
Sure I "refuse to believe" that MS makes good products, but that refusal comes from the experience of daily use, not some far-fetched ideological dream. My dream is less suck, more improvements that matter to me.
VS is good for one thing: MFC. MFC is good for one thing: creating a giant project to justify your MSDN subscription.
If windows is so craptastic then why the hell is everyone using it?
Because they share your incapacity for critical thinking? If products on cable infomercials and viagra from spam emails aren't the best things on the market, why do people buy them?
I listen to 5-10 podcasts a day in the car and at work. Perhaps you wouldn't mind tracking 5-10 sites for updates, but I'm happy to have it automated.
I also don't memorize the TV guide in order to figure out when my favorite shows are on. I don't log into a different BBS in order to get information from every mailing list I'm on or site that I want to check.
Why are these automated developments not significant? Why should I not care about them? Why am I wrong for being excited and happy?
1. You can't rob bloggers of something if they are giving it to you freely. Blogs don't have to have RSS feeds. The point of such a feed is to allow reading, searching and publishing of content elsewhere. Setting up a public feed must amount to some concession that others will use it, no?
2. You can't rob me of something that I don't have or want. If I want the experience of visiting a blog, I know where to find it. If I want to read it in my news reader (Google or otherwise), I know how to do that too. More options never robbed consumers of anything.
Your concerns might influence the decision content providers make about having or not having an RSS feed but no one is getting robbed here.
Microsoft Office will never appear on Linux - so what, we don't want it.
--
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
Is that an ironic sequence of sentences or what? You and I don't want MS Office anywhere near our Linux Boxen, fine. Does that mean that the coporate world wouldn't favorably react to MSOffice for Linux when evaluating the Linux Desktop? Just because I'm satisfied with the OSS software stack for Linux doesn't mean that I'm not pragmatic enough to realize that some closed source contributions can be beneficial to the extent that they lead to a reduced dependency on closed source OS's. Babysteps and all that.
For connections to random devices that don't need the speeds of firewire, and benifit from PC connectivity, USB is the obvious choice.
Spec-wise, USB 2.0 is faster (480Mbit/s vs 400 max for firewire). I've heard it said that real transfer rates are higher with firewire. Is that outdated information, just a rumor, or is that still the way it is? How much of a difference is there anyway?
You know, if this were a "news for disaster response personnel and enthusiasts," we would probably be discussing the disaster response. If it were a site for storm chasers, we would be discussing the storm.
This is however a site for geeks and nerds. Some of us (myself included) make a living in the specialized area of web application design and coding. We are uniquely capable of and interested in examining that sort thing. This is of interest to us, so we discuss it.
Telling us that there is more to life than choosing an operating system is moot. It's like going to a cooking site and telling them that there's more to life than choosing good cutlery. This site concerns itself with the choice of operating systems and browsers. Further it concerns itself with the choices (good and bad) made by software developers.
Returning to the matter at hand, this probably is a minor issue in the list of FEMA's screw-ups. Although we're still in the fog of war, it looks like the folks at FEMA with more important job titles than "Web Application Developer" were no more competant than the code monkeys that we are criticizing. Then again, I'm a developer not an expert in disaster response. I'll stick to what I know...
Anyway, how is this "a new low?" We're here to discuss technical stuff and we're discussing technical stuff. That's what we come here for. A bunch of people found a case of extreme stupidity in an area where they are uniquely capable of detecting extreme stupidity. They then brought the matter to a place explicitly designated for discussing such things and discussed it with others who share their interest. More power to them.
/. is not, does not claim to be and should not be in the business of providing perspective or balanced news. There are more than enough other places on the 'net that take care of that niche.
Re:Justification or excuse?
on
Pornified
·
· Score: 1
pornography pervades the Internet and drives the adoption of new technologies
(I thought pc games did)
Man... I'm replying to the same troll twice. Someone help me!
Since when does a -> c disprove the statement b -> c?
I've heard it said that Christianity drives the adoption of moral codes in a society. I later learned that such suggestions were misguided. It is in fact Judaism that does that.
Re:Justification or excuse?
on
Pornified
·
· Score: 1
Pornography is addictive, it distorts the viewers perception of reality, destroys families and eats away at the very core of our society because it dehumanizes people.
See, the difference between what you just said and a rational argument is as follows: A rational argument would offer evidence that would logically offer support for claims that it makes. Just for kicks though, let's play it your way:
Pornography is awesome. It brings eyesight to the blind, assists the elderly in overcoming dementia and Alzheimer's, strengthens the bonds of society and promotes the general well-being of citizens.
Is this really what passes for "insight" these days?
If the gaming on OSX ever gets up to par with the windows systems, then it would be my OS of choice.
How about this: "If OS X were your OS of choice, then gaming on OS X would get up to par with the windows systems." Obviously companies would release games for other platforms if they saw a demand.
What you're telling me is this: "I recognize that Windows is inferior but I will help it retain market dominance anyway, sacrificing my long-term goal (a nice OS) for short-term gratification (earlier game releases)." This is the perfect example of a good is the enemy of great situation.
When you switch cars, do you switch to a manual transmission just for shits and giggles even though you don't know jackshit about shifting gears (supposing you use an automatic)?
Yes. My current car (2004 Acura RSX) is the first stick I've ever owned. I'm not alone either.
I would think you would look for a car that's as simple as the previous one, but faster, cheaper - better!
My previous car was a 15 year old Volvo. The Acura was not cheaper. It was not simpler (different transmission, a *CD* player!, an alarm system, keyless entry, anti-lock breaks, and on and on... progress means complexity...) It was faster and better, but perhaps the manual tranny helps a little there? It definitely makes it more fun to drive...
People view their computers as their do their cars - goods beyond their comprehension that they can USE.
Many people do. Not all. Some of us want to know if we're being hosed by the mechanic. Some of us change our own oil. Some of us just want to know a little bit about the device that we're trusting with our lives on a daily basis.
I'll be the first to admit that I'm ignorant about a great many things, but that doesn't mean that I'll stand up and proudly defend my ignorance. Do you think that the frustrations that users experience with computers and cars (accidents, viruses, repairs, property losses, etc) could be avoided if those users were not complacent in their ignorance?
Why was this modded insightful? The gentleman appears to lack even basic knowledge of the topic of which he speaks. Namely, judging the relative merits of 3d eye-candy between competing window managers requires knowledge of what's out there. Linux and OS X both already have window managers available with 3d/transpareny/you-name-it capabilities.
What does Vista bring? Probably the script kiddie developers who can do for fat desktop apps what the js popup and status text scroll did for "web design." I can't wait to see what "cool" things MS and their 3rd party buddies will bring to a desktop near (well not too near) me.
Windows will (probably, unless it gets cut) (in the next 2 years, unless there are further delays) bring their system up to something (approximately - remains to be seen) as powerful as OS X is now. MS will likely be behind today's state of the art when they release. Add to that the high liklihood of major releases from all major window managers for Linux and Mac between now and Vista...
1. The whole MS monopoly thing
2. The crushing Netscape to make way for the blight of the net known as IE
3. Stolen/copied/embraced/bought out technologies from the DOS days to the present
4. Insert your favorite MS "FUD" here
After all that, an unsubstantiated rumor of an iPod-related patent gets you all in a tizzy? MS was in the news this week for patenting context highlighting of numerical data in a box!
What precise quality does this agressive, anti-competitive potential action have that hundreds of previous agressive, anti-competitive actions by the same company that actually happened do not?
Re:Podcasting is right up there with blog...
on
Podcasting
·
· Score: 1
Vote for the best reason why parent is brain-dead:
1) Podcasts aren't actually streamed.
2) Parent "parrots" a page which complains about stupid people "parroting" things.
3) Parent "parrots" every other vitriolic/. post about podcasts. These account for about half of all responses to any story involving podcasts.
As I always understood it, price was a function of supply and demand, not production cost.
It used to be that if production cost > market price, the product would not be made. Lately, it appears that the solution is higher marketing budget, suing customers for NOT buying your product, or both.
In any case, the cost of manufacture has little to do with price points in the content industry.
Learning another typing layout doesn't make you lose your ability to type on a Qwerty keyboard anymore than learning German might make you forget how to speak English.
Funny you should say that. As a native English speaker, I found learning German fluently to be easy. Well, not easy, but manageable.
It was not until I started my third and fourth languages that I discovered what the cognitive psychologists term "response competition." Learning German was all about learning an "other" way of saying things. When I was learning Spanish and Japanese, I had a clear conception of "other," but not which other. I would rarely use English, but could easily interject some German into a non-German sentence when groping for a word.
Before the modders drift over to "off topic," I'll conclude by saying that the same might be true of keyboard escapades. Learning a second layout might be manageable given the ease with which the mind handles duality. A third modification might be much more difficult.
Not to rain on the parade or anything, but aren't we exactly as close as before? I mean it's still exciting that we aren't further from freedom than yesterday...
First, Google, despite being the beloved of the geek crowd is Windows-centric again and again. I have working nVidia drivers on FC3, why can't I get an app to surf 3D satellite maps and such? Why is Keyhole for Windows? Is Google going to do ANYTHING with Linux? I don't see them as such darlings, but then I don't have an irrational FUD-based hatred of Microsoft so I am not seizing on them as a battering ram against Redmond.
You know, Apple isn't doing much for *Li*nux either, but they're beloved too. Why? Because they (Google and Apple) are releasing cool stuff. GoogleMaps is a new solution to an old problem that brings things to the table that were not there before. So is Tiger's Spotlight. I am and have for some time been a Linux user, but I recognize that most of Linux is not innovation in the feature space. Features are typically copied from proprietary software, generally Microsoft. Linux's innovation in the realm of freedom is a matter for separate conversation.
Why does Microsoft care who searches the web through which engine?
I visit Google's website every day, and I see the ads there every day. I cannot recall the last time I visited MSN. Microsoft.com for me is reserved for when clients call asking about MDAC issues (etc). Google's revenue is ad-based and it is substantial. MS wants a piece of that pie.
Third, why are people so interested in searching their own desktops? Hello? Anyone remember AltaVista and their search software? Whoopie. I get to have someone else write code so I can waste processor cycles searching my machine for files I should have been smart enough to organize in the first place.
You can patronize all you want, maybe you have never lost a file. Even still, you're thinking a little too small here. Those of us who have been devloping for some time, or writing, or for any reason have a lot of files have need for faster access. If I don't know where a file is, Apple's Spotlight is faster than looking for it. Frequently if I *do* know where it is, Spotlight is faster than specifying the path through finder. Who would ever use the start menu when they could use desktop search to run apps?
Another significant desktop search feature is stored queries. Maybe you group your pictures by date but not content. Maybe you group them by content but not date. How cool is a query based on whatever element you didn't use? Search allows you to create organization on the fly. Directories only allow organization along one attribute. This *is* significant.
I don't need anyone to search my desktop, Google doesn't write any sort of OS, and Microsoft has never been the search king in my experience. So it's like, who cares?
There are a lot of usability and feature innovations out there that you're ignoring because of a false distinction between OS and Web App. Search (not just finding what's lost, but getting what you want quickly, organized in the way you are currently interested in organizing it) is a Big Thing. Would you tell a DBA that he shouldn't need SELECT statements since he should already know what table the information he seeks resides in? MS and Google approach the problem from different angles, but it's a big problem with scope beyond their two narrow fields.
This is something that people do every day. That means that there is a lot of money to be made by the guy who does it well, first, or both.
Slashdot Mirror
Not a popular word around here, but *whispers* podcasting! I used to listen to the radio a lot. I was actually a DJ for a few years. Now I fill that need with podcasts. I have talk in the morning for my commute and music shows during work. It's an opportunity to hear new music. Better still, the music I find is RIAA-free which means I can buy it with a clean conscience (and I do).
My car doesn't have wi-fi, but it does have an Mp3 player that can sync podcasts. Advantage podcasts there too.
The biggest problem with the podcasting concept is that *anyone* can do it. It's hard at first to tell the wheat from the chaff. This is however the necessary price of variety. Commercial radio is of uniform (mediocre) quality. Many podcasts are worse, some (enough, I'd say) are better.
Podcasts might not be a 24/7 stream, but I've found that there's more good content than I have time to listen to. That's close enough for me.
~p
Try thinking a little bigger picture here...
Are the AIDS researchers dependent upon Windows software? Would foreign aid workers abroad benefit from sophisticated web applications? What have been the precise productivity costs in research and direct aid as a result of the gap between MS progress and the progress of a hypothetical free market?
Technology is the force that will result in long-term viable solutions to problems such as world hunger and healthcare. My degree is in neuroscience - a field that depends largely upon computer models and devices for things like fMRI imaging. Those are the tools of our research, the mechanisms by which things like Alzheimers, cancer, epilepsy and more are being investigated and treated. Advances in those tools will enable advances in research. Take this example. Chemsists are needed in order to figure out why people die when exposed to certain chemicals. What's more helpful: donating tons of money to an alchemist, or inventing, perfecting and selling the microscope?
Presumably, those involved in direct aid (as opposed to lab research developing solutions) would also benefit organizationally from a modern technology boom. That's not my field so I can't really speak any more to that.
Anyway, that's all a little off the original topic. Of course researchers and aid workers need money now. That's not the point. The point is that Microsoft has resulted in a net reduction in economic and technological power as compared to likely alternatives. I posit that that net reduction far exceeds any donation that Gates could possibly make.
Strange as it seems, funding is the easy (well, easier) part. Devloping the technology that will allow for 6 billion people to be fed and kept healthy is a much more daunting task. We're better off in this aspect with MS than without them, but we'd almost certainly be better off with a competitive market driving innovation forward. A healthy tech industry would generate more wealth worldwide than Gates can give.
You would rather that Microsoft scrape billions from businesses and individuals who are forced to use their software just because Gates donates some small fraction of those ill-gotten gains?
Why not just keep your money, spend it on a product that costs you less and doesn't cost the US billions annually in security flaws and upgrade costs and donate the rest?
Speaking more generally, Microsoft's dominance has slowed tech innovation (80% of internet users still stuck on 5-year old browsers for instance, but that's the tip of the iceberg) and costs its users billions annually. There is no way of knowing what exact cost Microsoft has had for the world in terms of productivity, technological progress and "TCO." The number however must be enormous. Certainly some portion of the deficit between a world without MS and a world with MS could be used to promote humanity?
*Yes, I know that MS has made numerous advances in computing. That's not the point. The point is that a competitive market would have been much more productive even than MS has been. The difference between those two overall values is the "opportunity cost" of allowing MS to hold us back.
South Korea. A capitalist regime where not much is sacred except the pursuit of money. Lot of money to be made in the cloning business, I'll wager.
~p
1. It's not 2006. =)
2. *nix types have had admin and least-rights users for decades.
3. MS could make this easier by allowing "sudo" style escalation like OS X and Ubuntu do. As it stands now, commercial software frequently creates problems for users who are doing the right thing and running as least-rights users.
~p
Sure I "refuse to believe" that MS makes good products, but that refusal comes from the experience of daily use, not some far-fetched ideological dream. My dream is less suck, more improvements that matter to me.
VS is good for one thing: MFC. MFC is good for one thing: creating a giant project to justify your MSDN subscription.
Because they share your incapacity for critical thinking? If products on cable infomercials and viagra from spam emails aren't the best things on the market, why do people buy them?
~p
TiVo/DVR: Just. Downloading. MP4s. Oh joy.
Internet: Just. A. Glorified. BBS. Oh joy.
I listen to 5-10 podcasts a day in the car and at work. Perhaps you wouldn't mind tracking 5-10 sites for updates, but I'm happy to have it automated.
I also don't memorize the TV guide in order to figure out when my favorite shows are on. I don't log into a different BBS in order to get information from every mailing list I'm on or site that I want to check.
Why are these automated developments not significant? Why should I not care about them? Why am I wrong for being excited and happy?
~p
2. You can't rob me of something that I don't have or want. If I want the experience of visiting a blog, I know where to find it. If I want to read it in my news reader (Google or otherwise), I know how to do that too. More options never robbed consumers of anything.
Your concerns might influence the decision content providers make about having or not having an RSS feed but no one is getting robbed here.
~p
--
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
Is that an ironic sequence of sentences or what? You and I don't want MS Office anywhere near our Linux Boxen, fine. Does that mean that the coporate world wouldn't favorably react to MSOffice for Linux when evaluating the Linux Desktop? Just because I'm satisfied with the OSS software stack for Linux doesn't mean that I'm not pragmatic enough to realize that some closed source contributions can be beneficial to the extent that they lead to a reduced dependency on closed source OS's. Babysteps and all that.
~p
Here's one suggestion
Spec-wise, USB 2.0 is faster (480Mbit/s vs 400 max for firewire). I've heard it said that real transfer rates are higher with firewire. Is that outdated information, just a rumor, or is that still the way it is? How much of a difference is there anyway?
This is however a site for geeks and nerds. Some of us (myself included) make a living in the specialized area of web application design and coding. We are uniquely capable of and interested in examining that sort thing. This is of interest to us, so we discuss it.
Telling us that there is more to life than choosing an operating system is moot. It's like going to a cooking site and telling them that there's more to life than choosing good cutlery. This site concerns itself with the choice of operating systems and browsers. Further it concerns itself with the choices (good and bad) made by software developers.
Returning to the matter at hand, this probably is a minor issue in the list of FEMA's screw-ups. Although we're still in the fog of war, it looks like the folks at FEMA with more important job titles than "Web Application Developer" were no more competant than the code monkeys that we are criticizing. Then again, I'm a developer not an expert in disaster response. I'll stick to what I know...
Anyway, how is this "a new low?" We're here to discuss technical stuff and we're discussing technical stuff. That's what we come here for. A bunch of people found a case of extreme stupidity in an area where they are uniquely capable of detecting extreme stupidity. They then brought the matter to a place explicitly designated for discussing such things and discussed it with others who share their interest. More power to them.
(I thought pc games did)
Man... I'm replying to the same troll twice. Someone help me!
Since when does a -> c disprove the statement b -> c?
I've heard it said that Christianity drives the adoption of moral codes in a society. I later learned that such suggestions were misguided. It is in fact Judaism that does that.
See, the difference between what you just said and a rational argument is as follows: A rational argument would offer evidence that would logically offer support for claims that it makes. Just for kicks though, let's play it your way:
Pornography is awesome. It brings eyesight to the blind, assists the elderly in overcoming dementia and Alzheimer's, strengthens the bonds of society and promotes the general well-being of citizens.
Is this really what passes for "insight" these days?
How about this: "If OS X were your OS of choice, then gaming on OS X would get up to par with the windows systems." Obviously companies would release games for other platforms if they saw a demand.
What you're telling me is this: "I recognize that Windows is inferior but I will help it retain market dominance anyway, sacrificing my long-term goal (a nice OS) for short-term gratification (earlier game releases)." This is the perfect example of a good is the enemy of great situation.
Are you the chicken or the egg?
Yes.
Do you care?
Yes.
When you switch cars, do you switch to a manual transmission just for shits and giggles even though you don't know jackshit about shifting gears (supposing you use an automatic)?
Yes. My current car (2004 Acura RSX) is the first stick I've ever owned. I'm not alone either.
I would think you would look for a car that's as simple as the previous one, but faster, cheaper - better!
My previous car was a 15 year old Volvo. The Acura was not cheaper. It was not simpler (different transmission, a *CD* player!, an alarm system, keyless entry, anti-lock breaks, and on and on... progress means complexity...) It was faster and better, but perhaps the manual tranny helps a little there? It definitely makes it more fun to drive...
People view their computers as their do their cars - goods beyond their comprehension that they can USE.
Many people do. Not all. Some of us want to know if we're being hosed by the mechanic. Some of us change our own oil. Some of us just want to know a little bit about the device that we're trusting with our lives on a daily basis.
I'll be the first to admit that I'm ignorant about a great many things, but that doesn't mean that I'll stand up and proudly defend my ignorance. Do you think that the frustrations that users experience with computers and cars (accidents, viruses, repairs, property losses, etc) could be avoided if those users were not complacent in their ignorance?
What does Vista bring? Probably the script kiddie developers who can do for fat desktop apps what the js popup and status text scroll did for "web design." I can't wait to see what "cool" things MS and their 3rd party buddies will bring to a desktop near (well not too near) me.
Windows will (probably, unless it gets cut) (in the next 2 years, unless there are further delays) bring their system up to something (approximately - remains to be seen) as powerful as OS X is now. MS will likely be behind today's state of the art when they release. Add to that the high liklihood of major releases from all major window managers for Linux and Mac between now and Vista...
1. The whole MS monopoly thing
2. The crushing Netscape to make way for the blight of the net known as IE
3. Stolen/copied/embraced/bought out technologies from the DOS days to the present
4. Insert your favorite MS "FUD" here
After all that, an unsubstantiated rumor of an iPod-related patent gets you all in a tizzy? MS was in the news this week for patenting context highlighting of numerical data in a box!
What precise quality does this agressive, anti-competitive potential action have that hundreds of previous agressive, anti-competitive actions by the same company that actually happened do not?
1) Podcasts aren't actually streamed.
2) Parent "parrots" a page which complains about stupid people "parroting" things.
3) Parent "parrots" every other vitriolic /. post about podcasts. These account for about half of all responses to any story involving podcasts.
4) I like podcasts, you insensitive clod!
It used to be that if production cost > market price, the product would not be made. Lately, it appears that the solution is higher marketing budget, suing customers for NOT buying your product, or both.
In any case, the cost of manufacture has little to do with price points in the content industry.
Funny you should say that. As a native English speaker, I found learning German fluently to be easy. Well, not easy, but manageable.
It was not until I started my third and fourth languages that I discovered what the cognitive psychologists term "response competition." Learning German was all about learning an "other" way of saying things. When I was learning Spanish and Japanese, I had a clear conception of "other," but not which other. I would rarely use English, but could easily interject some German into a non-German sentence when groping for a word.
Before the modders drift over to "off topic," I'll conclude by saying that the same might be true of keyboard escapades. Learning a second layout might be manageable given the ease with which the mind handles duality. A third modification might be much more difficult.
If I were really picky, I would note that "Jobs's" is a possessive, not a plural.
Luckily, I'm not too picky.
Not to rain on the parade or anything, but aren't we exactly as close as before? I mean it's still exciting that we aren't further from freedom than yesterday...
~p
You know, Apple isn't doing much for *Li*nux either, but they're beloved too. Why? Because they (Google and Apple) are releasing cool stuff. GoogleMaps is a new solution to an old problem that brings things to the table that were not there before. So is Tiger's Spotlight. I am and have for some time been a Linux user, but I recognize that most of Linux is not innovation in the feature space. Features are typically copied from proprietary software, generally Microsoft. Linux's innovation in the realm of freedom is a matter for separate conversation.
Why does Microsoft care who searches the web through which engine?
I visit Google's website every day, and I see the ads there every day. I cannot recall the last time I visited MSN. Microsoft.com for me is reserved for when clients call asking about MDAC issues (etc). Google's revenue is ad-based and it is substantial. MS wants a piece of that pie.
Third, why are people so interested in searching their own desktops? Hello? Anyone remember AltaVista and their search software? Whoopie. I get to have someone else write code so I can waste processor cycles searching my machine for files I should have been smart enough to organize in the first place.
You can patronize all you want, maybe you have never lost a file. Even still, you're thinking a little too small here. Those of us who have been devloping for some time, or writing, or for any reason have a lot of files have need for faster access. If I don't know where a file is, Apple's Spotlight is faster than looking for it. Frequently if I *do* know where it is, Spotlight is faster than specifying the path through finder. Who would ever use the start menu when they could use desktop search to run apps?
Another significant desktop search feature is stored queries. Maybe you group your pictures by date but not content. Maybe you group them by content but not date. How cool is a query based on whatever element you didn't use? Search allows you to create organization on the fly. Directories only allow organization along one attribute. This *is* significant.
I don't need anyone to search my desktop, Google doesn't write any sort of OS, and Microsoft has never been the search king in my experience. So it's like, who cares?
There are a lot of usability and feature innovations out there that you're ignoring because of a false distinction between OS and Web App. Search (not just finding what's lost, but getting what you want quickly, organized in the way you are currently interested in organizing it) is a Big Thing. Would you tell a DBA that he shouldn't need SELECT statements since he should already know what table the information he seeks resides in? MS and Google approach the problem from different angles, but it's a big problem with scope beyond their two narrow fields.
This is something that people do every day. That means that there is a lot of money to be made by the guy who does it well, first, or both.