Slashdot is eager to report stories on big media companies engaging in sensationalism while (consciously or unconsciously) falling prey to it as well. So long as hits = impressions = possible click-throughs we will see this sort of tripe. Are there any alternatives out there?
A few people are posting about what would be needed to create so-called 'iPod killers.' Now folks, I don't know what exactly happens, but it seems like once a product becomes mainstream, people like to:
1. proudly declare they don't use it (optionally including reasons that only make sense to them) 2. start an open source clone of it 3. and then evangelize it based on moral goodness
Regardless of the open source version's merit, you turn people off at step one. Now, I don't know what Apple has done to you, but a killer audio player is not formed out of spite for large corporations or the mainstream. It is made based on realizing where current players falter (battery life, size, UI) and improving on those. Nobody cares if the firmware is open source except the esoteric readers of Slash.
Seriously, how many projects do you start with the intent to 'kill' another product? And here is a player with Ogg support, now the hivemind complains that it doesn't support FLAC!
Nice post. There is a reason that engineers don't market products - they may know what they want and don't want in a product, and how to make it, but not necessarily how to make someone want it. Additionally, geeks often underestimate the effects of image.
The iPod is known by the mainstream -- thus making it cool to hate on on fringe sites like Slash. Except the complaints remind me of goth kids - disparaging the mainline because it is the mainline.
I believe most of VS.NET is written in C++. The Forms Designer is written in C#, among a few other things (add-ins can be written in C#, for example, implying the CLR being hosted inside of the app for extensibility purposes).
I still find VS.NET quite slow for an IDE, however. Once I got one gigabyte of memory it really seemed to help things, but I'm still somewhat disappointed with it overall. Gone is the perkiness of VS6.
Woah man, you used the number 666! That makes you hardcore! Next thing you're going to tell me is the gimp is actually a cover for a super-secret organization working to create cyber demons that can overrun Earth after a portal to hell is accidently opened!
Argh, why does every new language have to compile to Java? Some of us haven't bought into the 'bytecode as the savior of the modern world' ideology quite yet. I want to be able to develop desktop applications quickly, and without relying on massive runtime libraries.
Specifically, I'm looking for a language that is: * expressive - moreso than C# * multiple paradigm - supporting features like closures and first class functions * supports generic programming - this is too useful to leave out. I don't mean crippled generics (ala Java) either. * encourages good practices, but does not forbid dangerous ones outright * compiles to native code or bytecode * imposes minimal runtime overhead - in terms of RAM usage and CPU time
The closest fit to all of these is C++, but I'll be the first to admit that C++ is a trainwreck of syntax.
And one of the other most valuable things in life is learning to respect other people. Actually, that is more important than knowing how to laugh at yourself, simply because it affects other people. (Too bad such a simple truth is simultaneously profoundly deep.) The Net (esp. sites like this one) is a viciously cynical crowd that at times just seems out to laugh at the next guy that makes a mistake, and bicker about completely trivial things.
Were you that old, and caught in the same circumstances, you probably would have reacted the same way. It is easy to step back and assert you would have done the 'right' thing.
Uhhh, very good, especially considering the fact that is right on top of DC and hence a great place to work as a government contractor. Not to mention there are a few other major ISPs around. It has been called the second Silicon Valley more than once.
I wasn't aware that we can prove every inch of evolution forward and backward. Then again, I am not a scientist.
Just seems ludicrous to not teach one of the two major theories on the origin of the species because not every inch of it is explicable. I don't see how someone who is open-minded can be opposed to letting people choose for themselves what to believe. Saying, "well we are not 100% sure about this so we're not even going to tell you about it," just reeks of the American education system: "This is the way it is, test next week!"
Education is about questioning things, not chanting the status quo.
You can bitch all you want but if you're not exercising your rights and writing to the FCC in protest of PTU, then you don't really care. They are a special interest group, *gasp* acting in their own interests! Those selfish idiots! How dare they!
Next week, we can begin talking about how corporations are really just out to make money! Who would have thought?!
But then how will we justify our irrational love/hatred of corporate entities? And how will we be able to post about how such-and-such company used to be cool but is now definitely evil? Surely you're not suggesting arguments based on fact instead of raw emotion?
This might sound like a dumb question, but it involves Linux so please print this letter! I have this operating system that I really like, but no one else runs it. I've decided that the best way to convince people to use it is to force it on them. What is the best way to proselytize to the unwashed masses? Also, what sort of referral bonus do I get for converting my relatives?
The UI is a crowning example of why programs that insist on skinning themselves always suck. Opera never matches whatever desktop theme you have going (unless you fish out a theme that resembles your desktop's theme, and good luck doing that), feels very cluttered, and behaves idiosyncratically.
Opera would have been okay if it were $10, but not $30, and especially not now.
The Visual C++ 7.1 Toolkit comes with the C runtime library and the Standard Template Library. In fact, the one omission is the runtime version of msvcr71.dll/msvcp71.dll in the toolkit, meaning you have to statically compile it in. STL, by nature will inline itself right into the application as it is used. In essence, you don't *have* to worry about redistribution if you're using the toolkit because you can't compile a version that needs dynamic runtime libraries anyway!
Because the Slashdot hivemind doesn't hate Apple yet. It is only a matter of time before Apple slips up and becomes another evil corporation out to...gasp...make money!
We have known about this for a long time now. I played Tribes some, which has a pretty hardcore community, and despite Tribes Vengeance getting excellent reviews from a bunch of press magazines, the game has failed to net the elusive 'mass appeal.' Meanwhile, people are more than happy to play Counterstrike: Source, which is the same bottom-of-the-barrel-pure-twitch gameplay that had its heyday with Quake 1 (at least in Quake 1 there were items to control and techniques like strafe jumping to practice). And the reason they did not pick up Vengeance is simple: it isn't like other FPS games, and it was barely even marketed.
As long as the mainstream doesn't demand more gameplay than you'd find in CS, then we won't see this change. Case in point: Halo. It is a well-produced FPS game on a mainstream console. Despite the ridiculous control setup, and the very basic gameplay, it caught on like wildfire, and people are convinced that Halo 2 will be the best game ever because they haven't had much experience with FPS games.
Classic Slashdot comment: "my views are obviously superior to yours because they involve free software, so I should force them on everyone!"
What kind of webmaster barrages visitors with demands on what browser to use? Let the visitor read your site in peace for crying out loud! Forcing people to use Firefox because it is 'better' is no better than writing IE-only pages.
I find it ironic that you advocate such a step in order to 'free' the web. Perhaps a plan that didn't involve alienating the vast majority of web surfers might be more effective.
Slashdot Mirror
Slashdot is eager to report stories on big media companies engaging in sensationalism while (consciously or unconsciously) falling prey to it as well. So long as hits = impressions = possible click-throughs we will see this sort of tripe. Are there any alternatives out there?
A few people are posting about what would be needed to create so-called 'iPod killers.' Now folks, I don't know what exactly happens, but it seems like once a product becomes mainstream, people like to:
1. proudly declare they don't use it (optionally including reasons that only make sense to them)
2. start an open source clone of it
3. and then evangelize it based on moral goodness
Regardless of the open source version's merit, you turn people off at step one. Now, I don't know what Apple has done to you, but a killer audio player is not formed out of spite for large corporations or the mainstream. It is made based on realizing where current players falter (battery life, size, UI) and improving on those. Nobody cares if the firmware is open source except the esoteric readers of Slash.
Seriously, how many projects do you start with the intent to 'kill' another product? And here is a player with Ogg support, now the hivemind complains that it doesn't support FLAC!
Nice post. There is a reason that engineers don't market products - they may know what they want and don't want in a product, and how to make it, but not necessarily how to make someone want it. Additionally, geeks often underestimate the effects of image.
The iPod is known by the mainstream -- thus making it cool to hate on on fringe sites like Slash. Except the complaints remind me of goth kids - disparaging the mainline because it is the mainline.
What did you expect running pre-release software on a server OS retrofitted to a workstation role?
So, tell me how the XML aspect makes this substantially different from, say, Quake scripts?
Or is it because XML is just the flavor of the year when it comes to data representation?
I believe most of VS.NET is written in C++. The Forms Designer is written in C#, among a few other things (add-ins can be written in C#, for example, implying the CLR being hosted inside of the app for extensibility purposes).
I still find VS.NET quite slow for an IDE, however. Once I got one gigabyte of memory it really seemed to help things, but I'm still somewhat disappointed with it overall. Gone is the perkiness of VS6.
Kind of like people who fool themselves into thinking they know what they are talking about?
Woah man, you used the number 666! That makes you hardcore! Next thing you're going to tell me is the gimp is actually a cover for a super-secret organization working to create cyber demons that can overrun Earth after a portal to hell is accidently opened!
Psst, there's more to life than making everyone else use your operating system. Although I realize that very idea is just anathema to some people.
Argh, why does every new language have to compile to Java? Some of us haven't bought into the 'bytecode as the savior of the modern world' ideology quite yet. I want to be able to develop desktop applications quickly, and without relying on massive runtime libraries.
Specifically, I'm looking for a language that is:
* expressive - moreso than C#
* multiple paradigm - supporting features like closures and first class functions
* supports generic programming - this is too useful to leave out. I don't mean crippled generics (ala Java) either.
* encourages good practices, but does not forbid dangerous ones outright
* compiles to native code or bytecode
* imposes minimal runtime overhead - in terms of RAM usage and CPU time
The closest fit to all of these is C++, but I'll be the first to admit that C++ is a trainwreck of syntax.
And one of the other most valuable things in life is learning to respect other people. Actually, that is more important than knowing how to laugh at yourself, simply because it affects other people. (Too bad such a simple truth is simultaneously profoundly deep.) The Net (esp. sites like this one) is a viciously cynical crowd that at times just seems out to laugh at the next guy that makes a mistake, and bicker about completely trivial things.
Were you that old, and caught in the same circumstances, you probably would have reacted the same way. It is easy to step back and assert you would have done the 'right' thing.
Well, never mind the fact that he admitted to forging evidence.
Uhhh, very good, especially considering the fact that is right on top of DC and hence a great place to work as a government contractor. Not to mention there are a few other major ISPs around. It has been called the second Silicon Valley more than once.
Thank you for proving my point.
I wasn't aware that we can prove every inch of evolution forward and backward. Then again, I am not a scientist.
Just seems ludicrous to not teach one of the two major theories on the origin of the species because not every inch of it is explicable. I don't see how someone who is open-minded can be opposed to letting people choose for themselves what to believe. Saying, "well we are not 100% sure about this so we're not even going to tell you about it," just reeks of the American education system: "This is the way it is, test next week!"
Education is about questioning things, not chanting the status quo.
Er, why not just teach both theories and let the kids decide for themselves?
You can bitch all you want but if you're not exercising your rights and writing to the FCC in protest of PTU, then you don't really care. They are a special interest group, *gasp* acting in their own interests! Those selfish idiots! How dare they!
Next week, we can begin talking about how corporations are really just out to make money! Who would have thought?!
Slashdot, home of countless failed idealists.
More like it confers a sense of belonging to a larger entity, which makes them feel wanted, and hence good.
Kind of like the OSS religion.
But then how will we justify our irrational love/hatred of corporate entities? And how will we be able to post about how such-and-such company used to be cool but is now definitely evil? Surely you're not suggesting arguments based on fact instead of raw emotion?
(Especially poignant given parent's choice of links.)
This might sound like a dumb question, but it involves Linux so please print this letter! I have this operating system that I really like, but no one else runs it. I've decided that the best way to convince people to use it is to force it on them. What is the best way to proselytize to the unwashed masses? Also, what sort of referral bonus do I get for converting my relatives?
Sincerely,
trustedserf
The UI is a crowning example of why programs that insist on skinning themselves always suck. Opera never matches whatever desktop theme you have going (unless you fish out a theme that resembles your desktop's theme, and good luck doing that), feels very cluttered, and behaves idiosyncratically.
Opera would have been okay if it were $10, but not $30, and especially not now.
Give me a break.
The Visual C++ 7.1 Toolkit comes with the C runtime library and the Standard Template Library. In fact, the one omission is the runtime version of msvcr71.dll/msvcp71.dll in the toolkit, meaning you have to statically compile it in. STL, by nature will inline itself right into the application as it is used. In essence, you don't *have* to worry about redistribution if you're using the toolkit because you can't compile a version that needs dynamic runtime libraries anyway!
Because the Slashdot hivemind doesn't hate Apple yet. It is only a matter of time before Apple slips up and becomes another evil corporation out to...gasp...make money!
We have known about this for a long time now. I played Tribes some, which has a pretty hardcore community, and despite Tribes Vengeance getting excellent reviews from a bunch of press magazines, the game has failed to net the elusive 'mass appeal.' Meanwhile, people are more than happy to play Counterstrike: Source, which is the same bottom-of-the-barrel-pure-twitch gameplay that had its heyday with Quake 1 (at least in Quake 1 there were items to control and techniques like strafe jumping to practice). And the reason they did not pick up Vengeance is simple: it isn't like other FPS games, and it was barely even marketed.
As long as the mainstream doesn't demand more gameplay than you'd find in CS, then we won't see this change. Case in point: Halo. It is a well-produced FPS game on a mainstream console. Despite the ridiculous control setup, and the very basic gameplay, it caught on like wildfire, and people are convinced that Halo 2 will be the best game ever because they haven't had much experience with FPS games.
Classic Slashdot comment: "my views are obviously superior to yours because they involve free software, so I should force them on everyone!"
What kind of webmaster barrages visitors with demands on what browser to use? Let the visitor read your site in peace for crying out loud! Forcing people to use Firefox because it is 'better' is no better than writing IE-only pages.
I find it ironic that you advocate such a step in order to 'free' the web. Perhaps a plan that didn't involve alienating the vast majority of web surfers might be more effective.