Microsoft doesn't have a social obligation to do *anything*. If Microsoft (the corporate entity) decides to donate to a charity, fine. There is a tax based reward system in place to make it more enticing to to that, but it doesn't make them obligated.
Of course, this has nothing to do with Microsoft. This has to do with Bill Gates. RTFA.
And nobody was forced to use Internet Explorer, or Windows Media Player - but somehow, lawsuits were filed (and consequently won) over these issues. I'm not saying they were wrong, but it's a precedance that one should consider.
As for the games analogy, it doesn't really hold water, since the level of difficulty in porting a file format is neglegable, while porting a game is a different story. In these cases, you could at least license the rights, unlike Apple's 'Fairplay', which has to be the most ironic thing to name it.
This is a typical Microsoft ploy, only Microsoft would at least be willing to allow interoperability with those willing to license the technology. For example, if Apple wanted to make the iPod WMA compatibile, it probably wouldn't be an issue. Apple would pay for the right, and MS would give it to them. Though, you'll never see this, because the iPod and iTunes 'belong' together. Or so Apple would like you to think.
That's right. This is Apple we're talking about. If they could have it their way 100% of the time, it would be Apple with Apple only. Granted, they might make some nice hardware (I'm not a fan of their software though - it took them using someone else's operating system to come up with something halfway decent), but like Microsoft, they try to lock you in to particular things any way they can.
Why is it that when Microsoft has some kind of monopolistic hold over something, it's evil, but when Apple does it, all the zealots rush out to defend them?
Apple is a buisness. It's primary motivation is profit. What did you expect? Apple has been locking people in to their hardware for a long, long time now, and suing the crap out of anyone who would try to make them do otherwise. Just try to make a G5 compatible to sell. If it gets even remotely popular, Apple will rip you a new one.
This is the primary reason I'll never buy an Apple product - their practices are less than angelic, despite what people are lead to believe.
I don't know about you, but I backed that off to 0 hours and 0 minutes a day. The problem isn't with the internet displacing TV. The problem is with TV no longer being interesting.
Lets face it, the content gets more and more mindless, and the commercials get longer - TV is cutting it's own throat with this one.
Asking the slashdot crowd whether or not to use a Microsoft product is kind of like asking a large group of people whether they'd prefer to have sex with beautiful women, or stab needles in their eyes.
Sure, you're going to get a few who will take the needles, but you already know what the vast majority is going to say. While I'm not a fan of.NET, I'm not very partial to Java either. I'm pretty sure this is just another excuse to bash Microsoft.
Yes, I'm aware of it. The problem with it is, if you start using massive arrays in javascript then the client's box slows to a crawl. There are a few tricks you can use to speed up this process, but it's impossible to tell what kind of hardware they have, and how much load you can get away with.
If I were to hazard a guess, I'd say it's probably only good for small (less than 1000 items) search lists.
I've also tried my hand at XMLHttp, long before google started using it in gmaill and google suggest.
The result was a php reference and an interesting chat application. Don't know how well the chat client is going to scale though, never had a significant enough number of people use it at once.
(note, these projects were created before safari and opera decided to jump on the xmlhttp bandwagon, so for the moment they'll probably only work in Firefox, Mozilla, Netscape and Internet Explorer)
Google suggest is a neat idea, but a potentially destructive one.
Small sites should *not* try to do this kind of thing on a live site. The amount of pressure this could put on a bad database structure (or even a well formed one) is considerable. Think about how many database hits a user could perform in a very short space of time: (user enters something, (database hit) backspace (database hit) types another letter (database hit)), then multiply it by a hundred or more people if your site gets a moderate amount of traffic.
Google can get away with this because they have considerable bandwidth, and large server farms. We've been seeing people trying to copy google suggest for the last couple of weeks in #javascript/freenode and in #php/freenode. The people trying to copy it generally do not understand how potentially bad this can be for a single server.
Anyhow, my advice is, don't do it unless you have the resources to scale your site. The cost of such an insignificant feature (lets face it, all it does is save the user one or two clicks) seems like it outweighs the gain. If you do decide to do it, and your site gets popular, and you're on some kind of shared host, your sysadmin is going to hate you, and the other site admins will probably meet you at your house, torches in hand.
Before everyone is so quick to judge the google desktop search as a service that everyone should admire and love, you should be aware that it does it's own questionably shady things.
It was discovered by a friend of mine (who works on one of the available anti-spyware packages for windows) that the google toolbar basicly hijacks winsock for some unknown reason in order to operate. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't trust anything that is a Layered Service Privider (LSP) hijacker. At this time, we're not sure what it is using it for, but one thing is clear. It shouldn't need to wedge itself in there in order to operate.
It will be interesting to see if the Microsoft variant does something similar.
No silly application-file ownership, no proprieratory OSes (can run an opensource linux, including OpenZaurus, Gentoo, and probably others. I particularly like the Gentoo build, as I can use distcc with my home machine to do the actual builds for my zaurus all over WLAN. Then sit back and reap the rewards of hundreds of precompiled packages and thousands more that you can build yourself using the ARM toolchain.
I don't know about you, but these things when compared to a tunsten just seem a whole lot sexier to me.
While we saw this trend much earlier in particular communities such as w3schools
W3schools is a lousy representation of the global browser market share. Why? they cater to web developers who are obviously going to care what browser they're using day to day, and web developers will be the only ones showing up there.
Don't get me wrong, I love W3Schools - they're an invaluable resource. However, one should not see their statistics as a reliable cross-section of the general web population.
I never worry about this stuff because unlike some people, I don't race to fill in that warranty/registration card in the box with all my personal information.
The local retailers I deal with will warranty these items with nothing more than a reciept, which doesn't have any kind of personal information on it. On top of that, if you pay cash (not with a CC/Bank card) how is this serial number useful to them?
Opera has dragged, and dragged and dragged for some time now. While browsers like Firefox and Netscape all implimented a quirks mode to deal with badly crafted pages, Opera did nothing, prefering to ignore the fact that much of the world does not follow the HTML specs to the letter.
As a result, MANY pages rendered horribly in Opera until about version 7. I remember looking at pre-version 7 browsers and then thinking of the Opera slogan: "Simply the best Internet Experience". Yeah, right. Even mozilla in it's very early stages was a better browsing experience.
Today, there is nothing Opera does that can't be found in other browsers, for free.
Opera's actual market share is so miniscule that they're not really even worth designing for, and if it vanishes tomorrow, most people won't miss it, assuming they knew what it was in the first place.
MS using pirated software to develop & promote their media player
They didn't use pirated software to develop mediaplayer. If anything, they (might) have used pirated software to create a wav file.
There is no conclusive evidence at all to suggest that microsoft used pirated software to do anything. That file could have come from *anywhere* before it got to microsoft.
If you're going to argue the points, at least get them right
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft doesn't have a social obligation to do *anything*. If Microsoft (the corporate entity) decides to donate to a charity, fine. There is a tax based reward system in place to make it more enticing to to that, but it doesn't make them obligated.
Of course, this has nothing to do with Microsoft. This has to do with Bill Gates. RTFA.
And nobody was forced to use Internet Explorer, or Windows Media Player - but somehow, lawsuits were filed (and consequently won) over these issues. I'm not saying they were wrong, but it's a precedance that one should consider.
As for the games analogy, it doesn't really hold water, since the level of difficulty in porting a file format is neglegable, while porting a game is a different story. In these cases, you could at least license the rights, unlike Apple's 'Fairplay', which has to be the most ironic thing to name it.
This is a typical Microsoft ploy, only Microsoft would at least be willing to allow interoperability with those willing to license the technology. For example, if Apple wanted to make the iPod WMA compatibile, it probably wouldn't be an issue. Apple would pay for the right, and MS would give it to them. Though, you'll never see this, because the iPod and iTunes 'belong' together. Or so Apple would like you to think.
That's right. This is Apple we're talking about. If they could have it their way 100% of the time, it would be Apple with Apple only. Granted, they might make some nice hardware (I'm not a fan of their software though - it took them using someone else's operating system to come up with something halfway decent), but like Microsoft, they try to lock you in to particular things any way they can.
[..]what open source solutions are available to replace Dreamweaver's powerful templating capabilities[..]
Any text editor
I was going to craft a reply to your statement, but then I realized I was dealing with a troll.
Nice try though!
Why is it that when Microsoft has some kind of monopolistic hold over something, it's evil, but when Apple does it, all the zealots rush out to defend them?
Apple is a buisness. It's primary motivation is profit. What did you expect? Apple has been locking people in to their hardware for a long, long time now, and suing the crap out of anyone who would try to make them do otherwise. Just try to make a G5 compatible to sell. If it gets even remotely popular, Apple will rip you a new one.
This is the primary reason I'll never buy an Apple product - their practices are less than angelic, despite what people are lead to believe.
I don't know about you, but I backed that off to 0 hours and 0 minutes a day. The problem isn't with the internet displacing TV. The problem is with TV no longer being interesting.
Lets face it, the content gets more and more mindless, and the commercials get longer - TV is cutting it's own throat with this one.
they said that in 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001 ... are we seeing a trend here?
Asking the slashdot crowd whether or not to use a Microsoft product is kind of like asking a large group of people whether they'd prefer to have sex with beautiful women, or stab needles in their eyes.
.NET, I'm not very partial to Java either. I'm pretty sure this is just another excuse to bash Microsoft.
Sure, you're going to get a few who will take the needles, but you already know what the vast majority is going to say. While I'm not a fan of
Yes, I'm aware of it. The problem with it is, if you start using massive arrays in javascript then the client's box slows to a crawl. There are a few tricks you can use to speed up this process, but it's impossible to tell what kind of hardware they have, and how much load you can get away with.
If I were to hazard a guess, I'd say it's probably only good for small (less than 1000 items) search lists.
I've also tried my hand at XMLHttp, long before google started using it in gmaill and google suggest.
The result was a php reference and an interesting chat application. Don't know how well the chat client is going to scale though, never had a significant enough number of people use it at once.
(note, these projects were created before safari and opera decided to jump on the xmlhttp bandwagon, so for the moment they'll probably only work in Firefox, Mozilla, Netscape and Internet Explorer)
Google suggest is a neat idea, but a potentially destructive one.
Small sites should *not* try to do this kind of thing on a live site. The amount of pressure this could put on a bad database structure (or even a well formed one) is considerable. Think about how many database hits a user could perform in a very short space of time: (user enters something, (database hit) backspace (database hit) types another letter (database hit)), then multiply it by a hundred or more people if your site gets a moderate amount of traffic.
Google can get away with this because they have considerable bandwidth, and large server farms. We've been seeing people trying to copy google suggest for the last couple of weeks in #javascript/freenode and in #php/freenode. The people trying to copy it generally do not understand how potentially bad this can be for a single server.
Anyhow, my advice is, don't do it unless you have the resources to scale your site. The cost of such an insignificant feature (lets face it, all it does is save the user one or two clicks) seems like it outweighs the gain. If you do decide to do it, and your site gets popular, and you're on some kind of shared host, your sysadmin is going to hate you, and the other site admins will probably meet you at your house, torches in hand.
Before everyone is so quick to judge the google desktop search as a service that everyone should admire and love, you should be aware that it does it's own questionably shady things.
It was discovered by a friend of mine (who works on one of the available anti-spyware packages for windows) that the google toolbar basicly hijacks winsock for some unknown reason in order to operate. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't trust anything that is a Layered Service Privider (LSP) hijacker. At this time, we're not sure what it is using it for, but one thing is clear. It shouldn't need to wedge itself in there in order to operate.
It will be interesting to see if the Microsoft variant does something similar.
Forget palm, get a Zaurus and have it your way.
No silly application-file ownership, no proprieratory OSes (can run an opensource linux, including OpenZaurus, Gentoo, and probably others. I particularly like the Gentoo build, as I can use distcc with my home machine to do the actual builds for my zaurus all over WLAN. Then sit back and reap the rewards of hundreds of precompiled packages and thousands more that you can build yourself using the ARM toolchain.
I don't know about you, but these things when compared to a tunsten just seem a whole lot sexier to me.
Now flies 45% farther with the same velocity applied to previous powerbooks! Truly a breakthrough!
Well, they *are* Mac users. Confirmed certifiable if you ask me.
Christian Science Monitor
I shudder any time the words "Christian" and "Science" are used in the same term.
We could do all this before, what added value is there to running this kind of thing?
With an XBox it made sense because you didn't actually have a UI to work with. With a PC you don't need this kind of thing at all.
If you're going to run it on a mini itx and use it like a toaster, why not use movix or something similar that has an operating system with it?
'National Parks' ..
Who's nation though?
This is exactly what everyone needs, a digital mom!
Perhaps it can nag you to clean your desk, mow the lawn, and take the garbage out too.
do you come with an "apple zealot inside"(tm) sticker? ;)
An ipod has to be the dumbest reason to switch from anything to anything else.
While we saw this trend much earlier in particular communities such as w3schools
W3schools is a lousy representation of the global browser market share. Why? they cater to web developers who are obviously going to care what browser they're using day to day, and web developers will be the only ones showing up there.
Don't get me wrong, I love W3Schools - they're an invaluable resource. However, one should not see their statistics as a reliable cross-section of the general web population.
I never worry about this stuff because unlike some people, I don't race to fill in that warranty/registration card in the box with all my personal information.
The local retailers I deal with will warranty these items with nothing more than a reciept, which doesn't have any kind of personal information on it. On top of that, if you pay cash (not with a CC/Bank card) how is this serial number useful to them?
Opera has dragged, and dragged and dragged for some time now. While browsers like Firefox and Netscape all implimented a quirks mode to deal with badly crafted pages, Opera did nothing, prefering to ignore the fact that much of the world does not follow the HTML specs to the letter.
As a result, MANY pages rendered horribly in Opera until about version 7. I remember looking at pre-version 7 browsers and then thinking of the Opera slogan: "Simply the best Internet Experience". Yeah, right. Even mozilla in it's very early stages was a better browsing experience.
Today, there is nothing Opera does that can't be found in other browsers, for free.
Opera's actual market share is so miniscule that they're not really even worth designing for, and if it vanishes tomorrow, most people won't miss it, assuming they knew what it was in the first place.
They didn't use pirated software to develop mediaplayer. If anything, they (might) have used pirated software to create a wav file.
There is no conclusive evidence at all to suggest that microsoft used pirated software to do anything. That file could have come from *anywhere* before it got to microsoft.
If you're going to argue the points, at least get them right