Germans usually tolerate porn and other adult content more than in the US. In contrast vandalism, violence, nazism, or other cultist movements are censored in Germany.
Blizzard gets bankrupt and the servers are taken offline. What then? Oh and do not think it cannot happen. If there is something ample demonstrated out there, it is bankrupt game software companies.
The rod may be a dumb projectile launched by a cannon, instead of a missile. The advantage of a space platform is loitering time, plus the fact that it is harder to strike back at an orbital platform. This is the same reason why bombers used to fly at increasingly higher altitudes. Defensive weapon systems are harder to develop.
Also a kinetic weapon does not cause radioactive fallout.
There is more than one iPhone OS version as well. The thing is Apple does forced upgrades and has a more limited hardware selection. Oh and good luck upgrading your original iPhone.
IMO the iPod will eventually lose market share. The mid/higher end models will be replaced by smartphones. They low end models will not be enough to justify the investment into R&D. The iTunes store on the other hand...
I found I could live without the phone keyboard, as long as it has a capacitive display so I can do input with my fingers. What I would like would be a higher resolution, slightly larger, display such as the one in the HTC Evo 4G. Oh and video output. Imagine being able to do a presentation using your phone. That would remove a lot of cases where I need a laptop or whatever.
AMD has, or used to have, limited design resources. This meant they could have less designs done in parallel than Intel. So they have to use the same basic design across more product lines. Having a more expensive to manufacture product that you need to sell for a lower price, while you do not own your own manufacturing is not terrific for profits so you can fund R&D either.
I do not know precisely what he was referring to. However, for example, Intel just switched their processor production to 32 nm, plus they now include the GPU in the same chip package as the CPU. Near the end of the year they will release Sandy Bridge which will have CPU and GPU on the same die. The processor will have a dual core ULV version for laptops.
People have been claiming netbook sales were going to decrease for like two years now. This is due to several factors, mostly unrelated to the iPad. Windows 7 is more of a resource hog than Linux, so you have to include HDDs instead of SDDs (HDDs use more energy), use cheaper hardware components to defray OS costs, plus there is a high performance differential between a low end Intel Core 2 Ultra Low Voltage processor versus an Intel Atom processor, while cost is nearly the same. Intel needs to revamp their Intel Atom processor line, however they are not very interested in doing it because it competes with their higher margin products. Yet as GPUs are moved in core, power consumption will be lowered across all X86 devices, regardless of Intel Atom improvements.
IMO Apple did get some things right with the iPad. If you want to compete in a more mobile segment than existing devices you do not include a keyboard (which like doubles the metric volume of the device) or use an X86 CPU instead of ARM (which has worse power characteristics, meaning you need a heavier battery). The device should be light enough to hold for a prolonged time. If anything I think the CPU is probably overpowered...
My problem is with several other things. Namely the lack of standard interface ports on the device, or the positively pathetic OS support for things regular people will want to do with the device like LAN printing. Or with the input resolution: I expect to be able to produce content on such a device, which requires finer input than my finger can provide (optional pen input would solve this). This is clearly a first generation device which is unfit for most of my purposes. I also disdain Apple's totalitarian application environment. I dispute the idea that you will not want to do software development on such a device. My Commodore 64, heck even my Amiga, was much more underpowered and I did software development on it. I should be able to do anything I damn please on my own device.
Not to mention that the SDK only runs on MacOS X. Oh and get this: the compiler for the SDK is gcc. Which means... they could have easily rolled a cross-compiler. But why bother when it gets them more appleserfs eh?
I know you are flaming. Anyway you are dead wrong. I have developed several cross-platform open source apps and I refuse to develop for the iPhone OS platform because of Apple's policies. Which is probably a lot more than I can say for you. Oh and yes, I am "entitled" to be able to run anything I damn want on the hardware I bought.
Why does Germany need to invade anyone? They already have a major economic power in the EU. War is usually the resort of economically weak countries, or resource poor countries, against other countries.
You should also check the US debt soon. Most of the so called PIIGS countries (Greece exempted) have lower debt than the US. Also Iceland is not in the EU country to whatever you may think.
Bungie belongs to Activision now. But still the point of the killer app stands. However you will most likely find that the platform with the most apps in the long run will end up being the most open one. Guess which one that is...
You do not seem to know what Flash is. It is not merely a media plugin. It is a platform for developing applications which can be contained in a browser. In this regard it is not substantially different from, say, a Java applet.
Flash features a JIT compiler for a JavaScript like programming language, plus calls for drawing, animation, sound, video. The fact that Youtube uses it to implement a video player application does not mean this is the only possible application, in fact there are several. Years before Youtube was even founded people already frequented Newgrounds.com and played games created using Flash. Some people even used it to create whole (often horrible) web sites. Many things have claimed to be a Flash replacement in the past and none actually fully delivered in the promises. Flash always seems to find a niche of its own.
Even Flash was a vast improvement on the previous "standard" for web video - websites streamed for Windows Media Player.
Current and future hardware support is bullshit. The evolution in mobile hardware has been towards programmable platforms, using a GPU, or GPU like device for the graphics. If the GPU supports a GPGPU solution such as OpenCL or CUDA you can do hardware acceleration of just about any codec. If you read the docs on a lot of these "hardware" solutions, especially for complex algorithms such as H.264, you realize the "hardware" is actually a beefed up general purpose computing unit hidden behind layers of proprietary firmware.
Besides none of this explains why Apple does not implement Theora on a general purpose device they control the hardware design from the bottom up - like the iPhone.
HTML 5 video allows specifying several video files, in different formats, inside the same HTML object. This means, like happened for PNG vs GIF, a server can host both file formats, say Theora and H.264, and the client decides which one it wants to play back.
I have nothing against the HTML 5 video tag. In fact I think every browser should have it. I doubt Microsoft will only implement H.264 however. The problem with situation is that while Adobe takes care of paying end-user royalties for H.264 for anyone who uses their Flash plugin, the same is not true for current open source HTML 5 implementations. Check out the outburst from the Mozilla Foundation as one example. The same issue would apply to some other open source developer such as the KDE people working on KHTML.
It also means the Web would stop relying solely on royalty-free standards. This is one step towards building a walled web, which was the dream of people like Bill Gates (remember MSN?).
JavaScript has the "onMouseOver" event. Perhaps the iPhone OS platforms should not have JavaScript support then, because iPhone OS does not support a mouse pointer right? Oops.
Flash 10.1 is supposed to have GPU acceleration support for video. Perhaps you will reconsider eventually...
Besides if Google really, really wanted, they could just fund a Flash video alternative. But why bother when Adobe has a bone to pick after Steve Jobs all but declared a war on them?
Why distribute native apps at all then? Try running everything using data access on your cellphone while traveling abroad, paying roaming fees, and then let's talk.
Anyone can buy a copy of the standard by asking the ITU. Anyone can implement the standard by paying a royalty or whatever. The standard was defined by a standards body composed of several companies in the industry. This is what separates an open standard from a vendor pushed standard. The royalty structure means it is hard for free and open source software to implement such standards. However we should not, IMO, engage in revisionism and change the meanings commonly used definitions of what a standard is. Just call it a free standard, or a royalty-free standard, or whatever.
Slashdot Mirror
Germans usually tolerate porn and other adult content more than in the US. In contrast vandalism, violence, nazism, or other cultist movements are censored in Germany.
Blizzard gets bankrupt and the servers are taken offline. What then? Oh and do not think it cannot happen. If there is something ample demonstrated out there, it is bankrupt game software companies.
Also a kinetic weapon does not cause radioactive fallout.
Married people have sex? Who would know.
There is more than one iPhone OS version as well. The thing is Apple does forced upgrades and has a more limited hardware selection. Oh and good luck upgrading your original iPhone.
IMO the iPod will eventually lose market share. The mid/higher end models will be replaced by smartphones. They low end models will not be enough to justify the investment into R&D. The iTunes store on the other hand...
AMD has, or used to have, limited design resources. This meant they could have less designs done in parallel than Intel. So they have to use the same basic design across more product lines. Having a more expensive to manufacture product that you need to sell for a lower price, while you do not own your own manufacturing is not terrific for profits so you can fund R&D either.
I do not know precisely what he was referring to. However, for example, Intel just switched their processor production to 32 nm, plus they now include the GPU in the same chip package as the CPU. Near the end of the year they will release Sandy Bridge which will have CPU and GPU on the same die. The processor will have a dual core ULV version for laptops.
Yes, let them have cake. Who cares if people want bread?
People have been claiming netbook sales were going to decrease for like two years now. This is due to several factors, mostly unrelated to the iPad. Windows 7 is more of a resource hog than Linux, so you have to include HDDs instead of SDDs (HDDs use more energy), use cheaper hardware components to defray OS costs, plus there is a high performance differential between a low end Intel Core 2 Ultra Low Voltage processor versus an Intel Atom processor, while cost is nearly the same. Intel needs to revamp their Intel Atom processor line, however they are not very interested in doing it because it competes with their higher margin products. Yet as GPUs are moved in core, power consumption will be lowered across all X86 devices, regardless of Intel Atom improvements.
My problem is with several other things. Namely the lack of standard interface ports on the device, or the positively pathetic OS support for things regular people will want to do with the device like LAN printing. Or with the input resolution: I expect to be able to produce content on such a device, which requires finer input than my finger can provide (optional pen input would solve this). This is clearly a first generation device which is unfit for most of my purposes. I also disdain Apple's totalitarian application environment. I dispute the idea that you will not want to do software development on such a device. My Commodore 64, heck even my Amiga, was much more underpowered and I did software development on it. I should be able to do anything I damn please on my own device.
Not to mention that the SDK only runs on MacOS X. Oh and get this: the compiler for the SDK is gcc. Which means... they could have easily rolled a cross-compiler. But why bother when it gets them more appleserfs eh?
I know you are flaming. Anyway you are dead wrong. I have developed several cross-platform open source apps and I refuse to develop for the iPhone OS platform because of Apple's policies. Which is probably a lot more than I can say for you. Oh and yes, I am "entitled" to be able to run anything I damn want on the hardware I bought.
You should also check the US debt soon. Most of the so called PIIGS countries (Greece exempted) have lower debt than the US. Also Iceland is not in the EU country to whatever you may think.
Bungie belongs to Activision now. But still the point of the killer app stands. However you will most likely find that the platform with the most apps in the long run will end up being the most open one. Guess which one that is...
Flash features a JIT compiler for a JavaScript like programming language, plus calls for drawing, animation, sound, video. The fact that Youtube uses it to implement a video player application does not mean this is the only possible application, in fact there are several. Years before Youtube was even founded people already frequented Newgrounds.com and played games created using Flash. Some people even used it to create whole (often horrible) web sites. Many things have claimed to be a Flash replacement in the past and none actually fully delivered in the promises. Flash always seems to find a niche of its own.
Even Flash was a vast improvement on the previous "standard" for web video - websites streamed for Windows Media Player.
Even Microsoft allowed you to install any browser you want on their platform.
Besides none of this explains why Apple does not implement Theora on a general purpose device they control the hardware design from the bottom up - like the iPhone.
HTML 5 video allows specifying several video files, in different formats, inside the same HTML object. This means, like happened for PNG vs GIF, a server can host both file formats, say Theora and H.264, and the client decides which one it wants to play back.
I have nothing against the HTML 5 video tag. In fact I think every browser should have it. I doubt Microsoft will only implement H.264 however. The problem with situation is that while Adobe takes care of paying end-user royalties for H.264 for anyone who uses their Flash plugin, the same is not true for current open source HTML 5 implementations. Check out the outburst from the Mozilla Foundation as one example. The same issue would apply to some other open source developer such as the KDE people working on KHTML.
It also means the Web would stop relying solely on royalty-free standards. This is one step towards building a walled web, which was the dream of people like Bill Gates (remember MSN?).
JavaScript has the "onMouseOver" event. Perhaps the iPhone OS platforms should not have JavaScript support then, because iPhone OS does not support a mouse pointer right? Oops.
Flash 10.1 is supposed to have GPU acceleration support for video. Perhaps you will reconsider eventually...
Besides if Google really, really wanted, they could just fund a Flash video alternative. But why bother when Adobe has a bone to pick after Steve Jobs all but declared a war on them?
Of course if you actually do another phone (like HTC) then they sue you.
Why distribute native apps at all then? Try running everything using data access on your cellphone while traveling abroad, paying roaming fees, and then let's talk.
Anyone can buy a copy of the standard by asking the ITU. Anyone can implement the standard by paying a royalty or whatever. The standard was defined by a standards body composed of several companies in the industry. This is what separates an open standard from a vendor pushed standard. The royalty structure means it is hard for free and open source software to implement such standards. However we should not, IMO, engage in revisionism and change the meanings commonly used definitions of what a standard is. Just call it a free standard, or a royalty-free standard, or whatever.