honestly can we not just use web app for GUI development like Steve Jobs evanglised when they first launched the iPhone ?
That'd be fine if Safari for iOS were quick to support emerging web standards, particularly those aimed at platform integration. But if that were true, there'd be no need for things like PhoneGap/Cordova. Heck, it took six versions just to support <input type="file"> from HTML 3.2 (1997). This and other features appear to have been left out or delayed on purpose, with the intent to drive web application developers toward a native application on the App Store, with its periodic Mac hardware replacement to run the newest Xcode version, $99 per year annual fee, and 30% commission payable to Apple.
actual widescale rollout won't be profitable except maybe for small towns full of electronics nerds (who need that replacement CPU fan/SSD immediately) that are far away from electronics stores.
I guess it depends on what exactly is meant by "electronics stores", especially after RadioShack died.
Software that depends on undefined behavior is already broken. So is software that depends on implementation-defined or otherwise unspecified behavior without build-time assertions if practical.
inside there is always a huge list for workarounds to compiler quirks before the actual compilation can be started
A lot of these are the "build-time assertions" to which I was referring.
Isn't that the spec that's 6,000+ pages of gems like, "blah blah blah: Display this the way Office 98 did; blah blah blah: Display it the way Office 2K did;..."
It was. It no longer is.
ISO/IEC 29500 is indeed several thousand pages, and older drafts indeed deferred to the opaque behavior of other proprietary software when describing compatibility elements:
To faithfully replicate this behavior, applications must imitate the behavior of that application, which involves many possible behaviors and cannot be faithfully placed into narrative for this Office Open XML Standard. If applications wish to match this behavior, they must utilize and duplicate the output of those applications.
The final standard, on the other hand, fully defined these behaviors. For example, MSDN quotes the standard as defining autoSpaceLikeWord95 behavior thus:
This element specifies adjustments (detailed below) which should be applied to the spacing between adjoining regions of non-ideographic and ideographic text when the autoSpaceDE (Part 1, 17.3.1.2) and autoSpaceDN (Part 1, 17.3.1.3) elements have a value of true (or equivalent). This algorithm typically results in the following: an increase in the inter-character spacing added between non-ideographic and/or number characters and certain full-width characters; and no inter-character spacing between non-ideographic and/or number characters and certain half-width characters.
Typically, applications apply additional spacing between ideographic and non-ideographic characters/numeric characters when the autoSpaceDE / autoSpaceDN properties are applied. This element, when present with a val attribute value of true (or equivalent), specifies that applications shall apply the following adjustments to this logic:
Characters in the following Unicode ranges should be treated as ideographic, even though those characters are full-width forms of non-ideographic text: U+FF10–U+FF19, U+FF21–U+FF3A, and U+FF41–U+FF5A. [Note: This results in the unnecessary addition of space. end note]
Characters in the following Unicode ranges should be treated as non-ideographic, even though those characters are ideographic: U+FF66–U+FF9F. [Note: This results in the omission of the intended additional space. end note]
Similarly, footnoteLayoutLikeWW8 was defined to mean allow the layout engine to place section breaks mid-page even if a page has a footnote. I'm aware the name of the element is not ideal; breakSectionOnFootnotePage might have been preferable. But I find the intended behavior of this element clear.
Let us know when they finally trash their repugnant, solidly closed, proprietary MOOXML format
In what way is the file format family known as Office Open XML "solidly closed" and "proprietary"? It's documented as ISO/IEC 29500. Is that international standard subject to patent encumbrances that block royalty-free distribution of implementations, like the MPEG codecs? Or to encumbrances that block open collaboration on works in progress, like the Java platform?
What's the POSIX-compliant, standards-compliant version of WPF, WinUI and Windows Forms?
That depends. Does Single UNIX Spec/POSIX even specify a window system layer? Last I checked, X Window System was a separate standard from POSIX.
If by "POSIX" you mean "POSIX plus X", all that takes is someone to write X backends for WPF and Windows Forms. I seem to remember the Mono project has done something like this.
If you're packing a laptop, you need an amplifier and speakers anyway in order to hear anything below 500 Hz. The dinky little speakers built into your laptop's chassis are high-pass filters.
Software that depends on undefined behavior is already broken. So is software that depends on implementation-defined or otherwise unspecified behavior without build-time assertions if practical.
Binary-only software has not place in the UNIX world. [Yet] lots of commercial software in there.
Do you refer to commercial free software, such as Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), or to proprietary software distributed to buyers in source code form? (If "yes", which?) If the latter, how do publishers of said proprietary software protect their work from mass copyright infringement by judgment-proof individuals?
None of which are bundled in the price of home Internet access. This puts Usenet behind a $75 to $120 per year paywall in addition to what you already pay your ISP per month and per gigabyte for Internet access. (Source: "Best Usenet providers of 2018" by Desire Athow)
If you're on a 2 Mbps connection, and it chokes loading commercials, report the fact that it chokes loading commercials to your video provider. If you did, what was the reply?
Bang is another name for the exclamation point. DuckDuckGo has a few thousand shortcuts for site:example.com domains. Each of these shortcuts begins with the exclamation point.
I thought the line between curation and censorship involved whether the interfering party had A. a government-granted monopoly or B. market power (as defined in antitrust theory) over the dissemination of information. To what extent does Tumblr have either, other than sharing a parent company with RF spectrum licensee Verizon Wireless? The Larry Flynt editorial you linked mentions Google, Facebook, and Apple, which are far more likely to have market power than Tumblr.
GOP: 13/236 opposed = 5.5% Dems: 12/197 opposed = 6.1% They're not exactly the same percentage, but I doubt the difference between the two is statistically noticeable.
I thought the problem in Seattle was Director's Rules, where both the owner of the property adjacent to the node and 60 percent of other nearby property owners need to vote yes for any utility improvements, and not voting (such as an absentee landlord or a vacant property) was counted as a "no" vote. (Source: "What Happened to Seattle's Gigabit Network?" by Colin Wood)
I could try a pole with an antenna on top, which worked great at my last home, except my current HOA won't allow that.
It looks like your HOA is imposing rules about TV antenna mast height that "preclude reception of an acceptable quality signal". If the mast required for NBC affiliate reception is less than 12 feet tall, put it up anyway and tell your HOA to forward its complaint against you to the FCC.
Slashdot Mirror
honestly can we not just use web app for GUI development like Steve Jobs evanglised when they first launched the iPhone ?
That'd be fine if Safari for iOS were quick to support emerging web standards, particularly those aimed at platform integration. But if that were true, there'd be no need for things like PhoneGap/Cordova. Heck, it took six versions just to support <input type="file"> from HTML 3.2 (1997). This and other features appear to have been left out or delayed on purpose, with the intent to drive web application developers toward a native application on the App Store, with its periodic Mac hardware replacement to run the newest Xcode version, $99 per year annual fee, and 30% commission payable to Apple.
I think the intent was to forbid loading script from a different domain.
actual widescale rollout won't be profitable except maybe for small towns full of electronics nerds (who need that replacement CPU fan/SSD immediately) that are far away from electronics stores.
I guess it depends on what exactly is meant by "electronics stores", especially after RadioShack died.
Software that depends on undefined behavior is already broken. So is software that depends on implementation-defined or otherwise unspecified behavior without build-time assertions if practical.
inside there is always a huge list for workarounds to compiler quirks before the actual compilation can be started
A lot of these are the "build-time assertions" to which I was referring.
Isn't that the spec that's 6,000+ pages of gems like, "blah blah blah: Display this the way Office 98 did; blah blah blah: Display it the way Office 2K did;..."
It was. It no longer is.
ISO/IEC 29500 is indeed several thousand pages, and older drafts indeed deferred to the opaque behavior of other proprietary software when describing compatibility elements:
The final standard, on the other hand, fully defined these behaviors. For example, MSDN quotes the standard as defining autoSpaceLikeWord95 behavior thus:
Similarly, footnoteLayoutLikeWW8 was defined to mean allow the layout engine to place section breaks mid-page even if a page has a footnote. I'm aware the name of the element is not ideal; breakSectionOnFootnotePage might have been preferable. But I find the intended behavior of this element clear.
Let us know when they finally trash their repugnant, solidly closed, proprietary MOOXML format
In what way is the file format family known as Office Open XML "solidly closed" and "proprietary"? It's documented as ISO/IEC 29500. Is that international standard subject to patent encumbrances that block royalty-free distribution of implementations, like the MPEG codecs? Or to encumbrances that block open collaboration on works in progress, like the Java platform?
What's the POSIX-compliant, standards-compliant version of WPF, WinUI and Windows Forms?
That depends. Does Single UNIX Spec/POSIX even specify a window system layer? Last I checked, X Window System was a separate standard from POSIX.
If by "POSIX" you mean "POSIX plus X", all that takes is someone to write X backends for WPF and Windows Forms. I seem to remember the Mono project has done something like this.
just show ads 24/7
What else do you think QVC, HSN, Amazon, and eBay are?
If you're packing a laptop, you need an amplifier and speakers anyway in order to hear anything below 500 Hz. The dinky little speakers built into your laptop's chassis are high-pass filters.
Now you pay for it AND get ads!
How long have newspapers and magazines been using exactly this business model?
We already have a production fusion plant. We just need to scale up the antennas to receive the power that it is transmitting.
license compliance audits that flag Linux systems due complex / hidden rules.
Might those rules include, say, VFAT patents (before they expired) and exFAT patents (since then)?
Software that depends on undefined behavior is already broken. So is software that depends on implementation-defined or otherwise unspecified behavior without build-time assertions if practical.
Binary-only software has not place in the UNIX world. [Yet] lots of commercial software in there.
Do you refer to commercial free software, such as Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), or to proprietary software distributed to buyers in source code form? (If "yes", which?) If the latter, how do publishers of said proprietary software protect their work from mass copyright infringement by judgment-proof individuals?
I thought Youtube's business model was to steal everyone's content
Content ID with the block function available to copyright owners shows that this is not the intent.
There are plenty of Usenet providers out there.
None of which are bundled in the price of home Internet access. This puts Usenet behind a $75 to $120 per year paywall in addition to what you already pay your ISP per month and per gigabyte for Internet access. (Source: "Best Usenet providers of 2018" by Desire Athow)
If you're on a 2 Mbps connection, and it chokes loading commercials, report the fact that it chokes loading commercials to your video provider. If you did, what was the reply?
Bang is another name for the exclamation point. DuckDuckGo has a few thousand shortcuts for site:example.com domains. Each of these shortcuts begins with the exclamation point.
Unless the TV provider encrypts all video on demand with HDCP/DTCP and the "copy never" flag.
I thought the line between curation and censorship involved whether the interfering party had A. a government-granted monopoly or B. market power (as defined in antitrust theory) over the dissemination of information. To what extent does Tumblr have either, other than sharing a parent company with RF spectrum licensee Verizon Wireless? The Larry Flynt editorial you linked mentions Google, Facebook, and Apple, which are far more likely to have market power than Tumblr.
Usenet "went away" in the sense that major home ISPs have ceased operating news servers for their subscribers' use.
GOP: 13/236 opposed = 5.5%
Dems: 12/197 opposed = 6.1%
They're not exactly the same percentage, but I doubt the difference between the two is statistically noticeable.
I thought the problem in Seattle was Director's Rules, where both the owner of the property adjacent to the node and 60 percent of other nearby property owners need to vote yes for any utility improvements, and not voting (such as an absentee landlord or a vacant property) was counted as a "no" vote. (Source: "What Happened to Seattle's Gigabit Network?" by Colin Wood)
I could try a pole with an antenna on top, which worked great at my last home, except my current HOA won't allow that.
It looks like your HOA is imposing rules about TV antenna mast height that "preclude reception of an acceptable quality signal". If the mast required for NBC affiliate reception is less than 12 feet tall, put it up anyway and tell your HOA to forward its complaint against you to the FCC.
Spread all those Gbps over the whole countryside, and how many kbps will each subscriber end up with?
The same way HughesNet already does it.
In other words, harsh monthly caps for all bytes sent or received outside a window from 01:00 through 04:59 local time.