With the exception of Windows application developers who have been battling with GDI(+) for the last 10 years. The new graphics core of windows has been needed for a long time now.
True, but don't you think a new file system, API structure, or network stack would bring even more dev/IT people to the table? Consumer sales are nice, but it's IT sales that drive the industry.
Microsoft upgrade license sales disappointing?
Gee, wonder why that could be?
Perhaps it's the fact that a small business (like the one I work for) that uses Exchange would have to pay approximately $10,000 in software licensing costs for an "upgrade". Not to mention the new hardware that would be required to run the insanely gluttonous software itself.
Compare that to having a clever sysadmin and an installed base of RedHat Enterprise Linux with sendmail? Even with our yearly subscription costs of ~$600, it would take more than 15 years for the costs to equal out.
Give me the OSS headaches and clever admins any day...
This happens every time someone/something posts a list of the "Top xx" in any category...
You're bound to disagree with some if not all of the choices on the list, but it's there to foster discussion, not flame wars to decide who's "masterpiece" is the be-all end-all.
From the patent text: "Multitasking computer system for integrating the operation of different application programs which manipulate data objects of different types"
Is it me, or does this summary feel suspiciously like every other programming language ever written? It seems to me that core concepts fundamental to any language shouldn't be a valid basis for IP...
Mossberg actually did blast Real on several occasions for both their inability to provide a clear link to free Realplayer, as well as their big-brothered approach to "free" software.
Although I'm not sure if he had a direct impact on their decision, soon after his columns ran, Real revamped their site to make it "easier" to download the free player...
One of the reasons Mossberg is so well-respected is because he doesn't say things like 'Linux is ready for the desktop' without a thourough evaluation in the end user's interest. Because, as much as the/. community might think it is, Linux is unfortunately well away from mainstream Windows-dependent crowd.
And although he doesn't often put in a good word for Linus and the gang, he does frequently preach the virtues of 'alternative software', and isn't afraid to take on issues like ridiculous DRM .
So, in a nutshell, that is what makes him a good reporter!
I think your post is going to be somewhat of a foreshadow. I for one was very surprised when nobody blamed the DVRs right out of the gate. The TV industry has been so opposed to them all along, I had it figured it must be their fault.
"...if you look at sports, it can't be that football ratings are up 2 percent yet male 18-24 ratings are down 22 percent."
Maybe it's just me, but, sure it can!
Why is it so hard to believe that intelligent males in the 18-24 demographic are just watching those programs that interest them? It seems to me that this is a sign of television's viewing audience rejecting most of the mindless drivel that they put on these days.
After all, it used to be fine for me (when I was about 5 years younger) to just mope around the house watching whatever was on. But these days, I'm busy with life, so I just make an effort to watch those shows that I like. I think that is the real issue here.
Let's not confuse 'lack of standards' with 'lack of standardization'. My entire argument was that, although there does exist a very well-defined standard, it's not fully implemented in any browser that I know of.
The W3C is fine and dandy, and I appluad their efforts.
As to you're last comment, I agree. Tha's exactly what's needed to make CSS a contender in the market for dynamic page markup. But, until that happens, along with an industry-wide implementation of true W3C standards, thorough adoption will never happen.
Lack of CSS standardization
on
CSS for the LDP?
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
As I see it, there is a huge roadblock standing in the way of any organization using CSS at all, and that's a lack of standards.
Although there exists a defined template for the behaviour and appearance of each CSS element in the specification, there does not exist a browser that is fully CSS compliant. In fact, of all of them, Microsoft is the worst.
Now, the biggest argument here is that anybody using Linux will be using anything BUT MS products, but you're still not out of the woods yet. For, even between two browsers that are fairly good with CSS standardization, i.e. Apple's Safari and Mozilla's Firefox, you have not just suble behaviour differences, but also large gaps in the way each broswer handles such elements as left, right and relative positioning constants.
If all browsers had at least (somewhat) decent CSS compatibility, then I'd say yes, absolutely use it, because CSS has the potential to really imporove the layout of any site with minimal effort.
"...Novell had also learned from its negative experiences with Microsoft and wanted a very tight integration between what happened on the desktop and what happened on the server."
Novell claims to have learned from past experience (which is admirable), yet they still want "very tight integration"? Isn't this what got Microsoft in trouble in the first place?
Besides this test being ridiculously comprehensive, did anybody else notice the stat differences between the P$ 3.0 Ghz - 3.4 Ghz?
Or, more precisely, the lack of differences?
I wonder, is this just an inability of benchmark software to challenge a processor at such a high clock speed, or are these processors actually the same thing with shinier packaging?
Hmmm... So CWRU plans to cover the whole city with a blanket wifi coverage? And it's going to be free? And it will be in Cleveland?
Hmmm... Call me a skeptic, but I seem to remember when Apple said.mac would be free forever too. Plus, just thinking about the security issues involved with such a large scale rollout make my gut wrench (and it's a pretty big gut...)
At the university I attend, I'm on a committee assigned to develop an undergraduate lab that tutors and provides software support to entry level IT students (I'm a student myself).
When we finally acquisitioned all the machines, we had a pow-wow to decide what software to put on the machines. Most of the group voted open source, because of the low cost (free!) and wide avilability of programs. However, the administration felt otherwise. Since they had recently gotten a VIP "visit" from MS, they told us that we had to meet with them (the administration) to decide what platforms to use.
In the end, the "discussion" led to our adoption of.NET in all the machines in the lab. We reluctantly agreed, thinking that it would cost us very little through the university, and we could get free support. So, we begrudgingly agreed.
However, when classtime rolled around, the students that came in needed help with *nix and compiling using the command line!! Apparently nobody told the professors they were supposed to use MS software.
In the end, we decided to wipe all the machines and install Suse. When word about our actions got out, the administration had a cow. Needless to say, I am no longer decision-maker for the lab, and the same goes for the other open-source advocates.
It is somewhat disturbing that musicians in general now employ this technology on a regular basis.
In the "heyday" of music, (~10-15 years ago), artists didn't have this kind of tools at their disposal. So acts had to genuinely be able to belt out their tunes on key and in tune.
If so many artists today have to rely on this type of technology, what does that say about the modern pool of talent? Especially in the Pop and Rock genres, where it seems to be used the most.
Look, whether or not you like CI HOst is irrelevant here.
Your personal feelings about the customer service they gave you doesn't allow the justification of AOL's puported actions.
You may feel that they are a lowsy company, but that doesn't mean they and they're customers should be blacklisted from the largest internet service provider in the world...
Slashdot Mirror
True, but don't you think a new file system, API structure, or network stack would bring even more dev/IT people to the table? Consumer sales are nice, but it's IT sales that drive the industry.
Gee, wonder why that could be?
Perhaps it's the fact that a small business (like the one I work for) that uses Exchange would have to pay approximately $10,000 in software licensing costs for an "upgrade". Not to mention the new hardware that would be required to run the insanely gluttonous software itself.
Compare that to having a clever sysadmin and an installed base of RedHat Enterprise Linux with sendmail? Even with our yearly subscription costs of ~$600, it would take more than 15 years for the costs to equal out.
Give me the OSS headaches and clever admins any day...
This happens every time someone/something posts a list of the "Top xx" in any category... You're bound to disagree with some if not all of the choices on the list, but it's there to foster discussion, not flame wars to decide who's "masterpiece" is the be-all end-all.
Is it me, or does this summary feel suspiciously like every other programming language ever written? It seems to me that core concepts fundamental to any language shouldn't be a valid basis for IP...
It really makes you believe in the old saying: 1,000 channels and there's nothing on.
Although I'm not sure if he had a direct impact on their decision, soon after his columns ran, Real revamped their site to make it "easier" to download the free player...
Go figure...
And although he doesn't often put in a good word for Linus and the gang, he does frequently preach the virtues of 'alternative software', and isn't afraid to take on issues like ridiculous DRM .
So, in a nutshell, that is what makes him a good reporter!
Maybe it's just me, but, sure it can!
Why is it so hard to believe that intelligent males in the 18-24 demographic are just watching those programs that interest them? It seems to me that this is a sign of television's viewing audience rejecting most of the mindless drivel that they put on these days.
After all, it used to be fine for me (when I was about 5 years younger) to just mope around the house watching whatever was on. But these days, I'm busy with life, so I just make an effort to watch those shows that I like. I think that is the real issue here.
Let's not confuse 'lack of standards' with 'lack of standardization'. My entire argument was that, although there does exist a very well-defined standard, it's not fully implemented in any browser that I know of.
The W3C is fine and dandy, and I appluad their efforts.
As to you're last comment, I agree. Tha's exactly what's needed to make CSS a contender in the market for dynamic page markup. But, until that happens, along with an industry-wide implementation of true W3C standards, thorough adoption will never happen.
Although there exists a defined template for the behaviour and appearance of each CSS element in the specification, there does not exist a browser that is fully CSS compliant. In fact, of all of them, Microsoft is the worst.
Now, the biggest argument here is that anybody using Linux will be using anything BUT MS products, but you're still not out of the woods yet. For, even between two browsers that are fairly good with CSS standardization, i.e. Apple's Safari and Mozilla's Firefox, you have not just suble behaviour differences, but also large gaps in the way each broswer handles such elements as left, right and relative positioning constants.
If all browsers had at least (somewhat) decent CSS compatibility, then I'd say yes, absolutely use it, because CSS has the potential to really imporove the layout of any site with minimal effort.
A domain-squatter lawsuit over http://www.youmaybenext.com just because it happens to be some pro-wrestlers's death mantra.
This makes me harken back to the days of yore...
Novell claims to have learned from past experience (which is admirable), yet they still want "very tight integration"? Isn't this what got Microsoft in trouble in the first place?
Or, more precisely, the lack of differences?
I wonder, is this just an inability of benchmark software to challenge a processor at such a high clock speed, or are these processors actually the same thing with shinier packaging?
Thoughts?
Hmmm... Call me a skeptic, but I seem to remember when Apple said .mac would be free forever too. Plus, just thinking about the security issues involved with such a large scale rollout make my gut wrench (and it's a pretty big gut...)
When we finally acquisitioned all the machines, we had a pow-wow to decide what software to put on the machines. Most of the group voted open source, because of the low cost (free!) and wide avilability of programs. However, the administration felt otherwise. Since they had recently gotten a VIP "visit" from MS, they told us that we had to meet with them (the administration) to decide what platforms to use.
In the end, the "discussion" led to our adoption of .NET in all the machines in the lab. We reluctantly agreed, thinking that it would cost us very little through the university, and we could get free support. So, we begrudgingly agreed.
However, when classtime rolled around, the students that came in needed help with *nix and compiling using the command line!! Apparently nobody told the professors they were supposed to use MS software.
In the end, we decided to wipe all the machines and install Suse. When word about our actions got out, the administration had a cow. Needless to say, I am no longer decision-maker for the lab, and the same goes for the other open-source advocates.
So much for University freedom of speech...
In the "heyday" of music, (~10-15 years ago), artists didn't have this kind of tools at their disposal. So acts had to genuinely be able to belt out their tunes on key and in tune.
If so many artists today have to rely on this type of technology, what does that say about the modern pool of talent? Especially in the Pop and Rock genres, where it seems to be used the most.
Look, whether or not you like CI HOst is irrelevant here. Your personal feelings about the customer service they gave you doesn't allow the justification of AOL's puported actions. You may feel that they are a lowsy company, but that doesn't mean they and they're customers should be blacklisted from the largest internet service provider in the world...