>> 'programming may in fact be transforming into an art, one that requires a skilled hand and a creative mind to achieve a happy medium between problematic extremes.'"
Its not transforming into it, it's always been an art. And that has got nothing to do with whether its web programming or not.
The reason that this is even news to some people is that most managers fight hard to bury that fact, because the vast majority of them are one-trick ponies that incorrectly think that everything can and should be reduced into a plannable production line process, and that we developers are all simply non-creative, cheap and freely interchangeable commodity called a 'coder'.
Admitting programming is an art makes management have to admit that: 1) Not all programmers are the same therefore we have value, so need to be paid appropriately. 2) Its not a predictable process so you can't micro-manage us.
It seems to me that by perpetuating this ridiculous paranoia of terrorist attack, and the subsequent removal of our rights, freedoms and privacy, our own governments continue to reward the terrorists with much greater victories than they could ever possibly achieve on their own.
I hope all the students make sure their pcs are clean then repeatedly download all the legal torrents they can find available as many times as they can. I'm thinking they could do 'research' into linux distros.
The police will soon tell the university to shove their stupid rule.
>>> "Microsoft will continue to make advances in these types of safeguards and work closely with law enforcement and product safety groups to keep Kinect tamper-resistant."
Law enforcement? Really? wow. Its just a game controller guys.
Its great. Whenever I start getting tempted to spend money, somehow Microsoft always knows to say/do something extra stupid to re-strengthen my commitment to never buy any Microsoft or Microsoft-based products.
I wonder if Microsoft even have a clue about how much damage their arrogant attitude is doing to their potential market?
Seriously? You would be happy to pay $100's for a phone protected by Microsoft security then find out some anonymous IT person remotely bricked it without your prior permission when it picked up a virus? You'd buy that? Really?
Can I interest you in some swamp^H^H^H^H^H waterfront property I have for sale?
The bandwidth problem in my neighborhood appears to be more to do with the inability of my ISP to buy sufficiently powerful equipment to properly handle the load, not my connection to it.
I suspect my scenario is more representative of the actual problem in many cases, at least in the US.
The only thing keeping me from not getting rid of my windows partition is gaming.
My computer has an intel i7-950 processor, 6GB or ram and an nVidia 8800GTX video card. Its no slouch but its not competitive with the current hardcore gaming rigs.
About a month ago I decided to check if running windows under a VM was now viable even for 3D hardware-accelerated gaming. This approach would also have the advantage that I could keep a 'golden' windows VM image and forever eliminate the need to ever reinstall windows from scratch again, (and the associated pain of also having to reinstall all drivers, apps, service packs and misc patches that result in needing to reboot about 50 times). Also hitting the terminally stupid and insulting windows authentication limit would no longer be an issue.
After attempting to run several 3D accelerated windows games under both virtual box and vmware player, I concluded that virtual box had marginally faster performance, however it often wouldn't run 3D hardware games well or at all due to lack of robust 3D hardware support. VMware player had much better 3D hardware support, especially around DirectX 10 and ran everything I threw at it.
I also concluded that the performance hit of running windows games under a VM was still too significant for online 'twitch' games like Unreal Tournament that are primarily based on reaction time, however many 3D HW-accelerated games aren't really affected by somewhat reduced framerates (i.e. more strategy-based games)and those are perfectly playable under a VM. It seems if you're a windows gamer, its the types of games you play that is the factor of whether a windows VM solution is a good choice for you.
The difference between vmware player and virtual box correlate with expectations as Vmware player is a much more mature product (slow, robust) than Virtual Box (fast, unstable) for 3D gaming. I read somewhere that Oracle are committed to improving Virtual box's DirectX/3D hardware support in future though.
Currently I would recommend VMware player for 3D gamers looking to switch to Windows under a VM simply because of its better 3D support. However because of its performance edge, all it would take for Virtual Box to edge out VMware player would be if Virtual box got the same level of robust 3D support as VMware player.
Don't forget WINE too. If your windows game happens to install and work under WINE, then that is still a significantly faster performing option than running a game under a Windows VM.
I remember (my) Amiga had instant boot at powerup just by having its OS in ROM. OK it did run a startup script but that just kicked off stuff that applied user-specific customisations to the desktop environment you got immediately at power-on. That was maybe 20 years ago. I'm still waiting for other computers to catch up.
All the US cell companies need to focus on building adequate infrastructure instead of continually trying to oversell something they can't actually provide.
Even of the few available, most 'live' movies (as opposed to entirely CG) have been "converted" from 2D rather than originally filmed in 3D. The results suck as much as you would expect.
The article said the best thing they like the fact that it has full voiceovers. I hate that as its a clear indication that the game must be totally locked on its rails. 0 replay value.
Honestly I'd rather just watch a movie. Actually it amounts to the same thing (except a movie DVD is cheaper, and has a better plot). What is it with games these days? So narrow... I guess its cheaper/quicker to develop one long script instead of a truly dynamic environment.
I wish that reporters would take more care to report technical stuff accurately.
As far as I know, an Iphone doesn't even contain the hardware necessary to receive ADS-B transmissions directly from an aircraft.
I'm guessing the phone is actually getting it (possibly indirectly) from some internet source. If that information is indeed a security risk (which I find hard to believe anyway) maybe the source is what should be addressed, not some stupid app that just aggregates it.
Sorry but torrent technology is way overhyped and overrated. I've nearly always found that torrents are very significantly slower than just plain ol' FTP/HTTP downloads even from busy servers.
Blizzard is given as an example of good torrennt use, but in practice, setting up WoW is a pain in the ass that literally takes hours from scratch, which wouldn't be the case if they invested in a simple HTTP or FTP server.
Many times I've had to wait for hours or even days for other torrents, occasionally even a small one annoyingly and for no apparent reason just refuses to complete even though there are seeders.
Meanwhile if its also available with FTP/HTTP, I can often get the same file, even large ones, painlessly and in minutes with conventional download techniques.
I'm very sure that my firewall, router etc is configured ok. I guess my ISP (Cox) could be limiting my bandwidth just for torrent traffic, but I do occasionally get a fast torrent which suggests they dont (at least they arent doing it universally).
These days most servers and browsers support 'resume' for HTTP and even FTP transfers anyway so at least one of the big 'advantages' of bittorrent claimed in the article is actually moot.
>> What would it cost? in volume probably not much more. If they passed the difference on, the percentage increase in the overall product price would likely be negligible tradeoff against making the device have a lot more appeal and to a wider market.
>> How many minutes would the battery last? Have you any actual proof that a higher screen resolution screen == higher power consumption? My understanding is that the backlighting is where the significant majority of all the power goes so screen resolution largely doesn't matter. Also I understand power consumption could in fact be less for a higher res. screen than a lower res. one depending on the tech used in each.
>> Have you ever thought, even once, before posting? Don't be a dick. of course I have.
The device already apparently supports HD via HDCP. Would it *really* have been so hard for them to have made the LCD panel 1920x1080? Why do so many manufacturers avoid putting full-HD-res screens on their supposedly HD-compatible stuff?
Slashdot Mirror
>> 'programming may in fact be transforming into an art, one that requires a skilled hand and a creative mind to achieve a happy medium between problematic extremes.'"
Its not transforming into it, it's always been an art. And that has got nothing to do with whether its web programming or not.
The reason that this is even news to some people is that most managers fight hard to bury that fact, because the vast majority of them are one-trick ponies that incorrectly think that everything can and should be reduced into a plannable production line process, and that we developers are all simply non-creative, cheap and freely interchangeable commodity called a 'coder'.
Admitting programming is an art makes management have to admit that:
1) Not all programmers are the same therefore we have value, so need to be paid appropriately.
2) Its not a predictable process so you can't micro-manage us.
It seems to me that by perpetuating this ridiculous paranoia of terrorist attack, and the subsequent removal of our rights, freedoms and privacy, our own governments continue to reward the terrorists with much greater victories than they could ever possibly achieve on their own.
It would be a great platform for a Pirate Radio station.
You're going to give a laptop running Windows to a 4 year old?
Doesn't that constitute child abuse?
For the love of God, install Linux on it first.
Just by keeping your network and infrastructure completely free of any Microsoft products, you'll already be mostly there.
I hope all the students make sure their pcs are clean then repeatedly download all the legal torrents they can find available as many times as they can. I'm thinking they could do 'research' into linux distros.
The police will soon tell the university to shove their stupid rule.
>> Once you sell one to me, it's my product, morons.
Are you _sure_ about that? Its certainly not true with their software (read the EULA).
>>> "Microsoft will continue to make advances in these types of safeguards and work closely with law enforcement and product safety groups to keep Kinect tamper-resistant."
Law enforcement? Really? wow. Its just a game controller guys.
Its great. Whenever I start getting tempted to spend money, somehow Microsoft always knows to say/do something extra stupid to re-strengthen my commitment to never buy any Microsoft or Microsoft-based products.
I wonder if Microsoft even have a clue about how much damage their arrogant attitude is doing to their potential market?
Seriously?
You would be happy to pay $100's for a phone protected by Microsoft security then find out some anonymous IT person remotely bricked it without your prior permission when it picked up a virus? You'd buy that? Really?
Can I interest you in some swamp^H^H^H^H^H waterfront property I have for sale?
>>> Verizon Wireless said ... 'We accept responsibility for those errors...'
Its funny how you never see any billing 'errors' where the company is the one loosing out.
The bandwidth problem in my neighborhood appears to be more to do with the inability of my ISP to buy sufficiently powerful equipment to properly handle the load, not my connection to it.
I suspect my scenario is more representative of the actual problem in many cases, at least in the US.
The only thing keeping me from not getting rid of my windows partition is gaming.
My computer has an intel i7-950 processor, 6GB or ram and an nVidia 8800GTX video card. Its no slouch but its not competitive with the current hardcore gaming rigs.
About a month ago I decided to check if running windows under a VM was now viable even for 3D hardware-accelerated gaming. This approach would also have the advantage that I could keep a 'golden' windows VM image and forever eliminate the need to ever reinstall windows from scratch again, (and the associated pain of also having to reinstall all drivers, apps, service packs and misc patches that result in needing to reboot about 50 times). Also hitting the terminally stupid and insulting windows authentication limit would no longer be an issue.
After attempting to run several 3D accelerated windows games under both virtual box and vmware player, I concluded that virtual box had marginally faster performance, however it often wouldn't run 3D hardware games well or at all due to lack of robust 3D hardware support. VMware player had much better 3D hardware support, especially around DirectX 10 and ran everything I threw at it.
I also concluded that the performance hit of running windows games under a VM was still too significant for online 'twitch' games like Unreal Tournament that are primarily based on reaction time, however many 3D HW-accelerated games aren't really affected by somewhat reduced framerates (i.e. more strategy-based games)and those are perfectly playable under a VM. It seems if you're a windows gamer, its the types of games you play that is the factor of whether a windows VM solution is a good choice for you.
The difference between vmware player and virtual box correlate with expectations as Vmware player is a much more mature product (slow, robust) than Virtual Box (fast, unstable) for 3D gaming. I read somewhere that Oracle are committed to improving Virtual box's DirectX/3D hardware support in future though.
Currently I would recommend VMware player for 3D gamers looking to switch to Windows under a VM simply because of its better 3D support. However because of its performance edge, all it would take for Virtual Box to edge out VMware player would be if Virtual box got the same level of robust 3D support as VMware player.
Don't forget WINE too. If your windows game happens to install and work under WINE, then that is still a significantly faster performing option than running a game under a Windows VM.
I remember (my) Amiga had instant boot at powerup just by having its OS in ROM.
OK it did run a startup script but that just kicked off stuff that applied user-specific customisations to the desktop environment you got immediately at power-on.
That was maybe 20 years ago. I'm still waiting for other computers to catch up.
He had 10 years of his work on one hard drive and didn't ever do any backups?
Wow.
It seems you can be really stupid and still become a professor.
Anyone who actively seeks becoming a cop (or a politician) has already proven they are fundamentally the wrong person for the job.
All the US cell companies need to focus on building adequate infrastructure instead of continually trying to oversell something they can't actually provide.
Its hardly a surprise when you look at the number and quality of 3D blu-ray movies available.
http://www.3dmovielist.com/list.html
Even of the few available, most 'live' movies (as opposed to entirely CG) have been "converted" from 2D rather than originally filmed in 3D.
The results suck as much as you would expect.
The article said the best thing they like the fact that it has full voiceovers.
I hate that as its a clear indication that the game must be totally locked on its rails.
0 replay value.
Honestly I'd rather just watch a movie. Actually it amounts to the same thing (except a movie DVD is cheaper, and has a better plot).
What is it with games these days? So narrow... I guess its cheaper/quicker to develop one long script instead of a truly dynamic environment.
It would be cool if you contacted Microsoft and told them you're prepared to licence the rights to them. I'd love to see them wriggle and their reply.
>> He only gets fed if he responds to the "Your food is ready" email within 15 minutes.
From his website, you'd be doing him a favor.
He could probably survive a six month sentence without any food just by living off his own fat.
I wish that reporters would take more care to report technical stuff accurately.
As far as I know, an Iphone doesn't even contain the hardware necessary to receive ADS-B transmissions directly from an aircraft.
I'm guessing the phone is actually getting it (possibly indirectly) from some internet source. If that information is indeed a security risk (which I find hard to believe anyway) maybe the source is what should be addressed, not some stupid app that just aggregates it.
Sorry but torrent technology is way overhyped and overrated. I've nearly always found that torrents are very significantly slower than just plain ol' FTP/HTTP downloads even from busy servers.
Blizzard is given as an example of good torrennt use, but in practice, setting up WoW is a pain in the ass that literally takes hours from scratch, which wouldn't be the case if they invested in a simple HTTP or FTP server.
Many times I've had to wait for hours or even days for other torrents, occasionally even a small one annoyingly and for no apparent reason just refuses to complete even though there are seeders.
Meanwhile if its also available with FTP/HTTP, I can often get the same file, even large ones, painlessly and in minutes with conventional download techniques.
I'm very sure that my firewall, router etc is configured ok. I guess my ISP (Cox) could be limiting my bandwidth just for torrent traffic, but I do occasionally get a fast torrent which suggests they dont (at least they arent doing it universally).
These days most servers and browsers support 'resume' for HTTP and even FTP transfers anyway so at least one of the big 'advantages' of bittorrent claimed in the article is actually moot.
Interesting.
One of the most reliable (and fun to drive) cars I ever had was an old fiat.
>> What's the smallest physical screen that can do that resolution?
Uhh how about this one thats been around for 4 years that also happens to be 7":
http://www.engadget.com/2006/10/17/sanyo-epson-announce-7-1-inch-1080p-lcd-by-far-the-worlds-smal/
>> What would it cost?
in volume probably not much more. If they passed the difference on, the percentage increase in the overall product price would likely be negligible tradeoff against making the device have a lot more appeal and to a wider market.
>> How many minutes would the battery last?
Have you any actual proof that a higher screen resolution screen == higher power consumption? My understanding is that the backlighting is where the significant majority of all the power goes so screen resolution largely doesn't matter. Also I understand power consumption could in fact be less for a higher res. screen than a lower res. one depending on the tech used in each.
>> Have you ever thought, even once, before posting?
Don't be a dick. of course I have.
The device already apparently supports HD via HDCP.
Would it *really* have been so hard for them to have made the LCD panel 1920x1080?
Why do so many manufacturers avoid putting full-HD-res screens on their supposedly HD-compatible stuff?