It also seems strange that the text of the patents is always very specific and detailed, but in application (of the ubiquitous lawsuits), they try for a very general all-encompassing interpretation. What is the basis for that? And why are they not immediately tossed out of court without further consideration?
I think you don't quite understand his character, which seems pretty clear from the article (and some others). You ask the same things of a chronic spammer, or a pimp with an expectation of similar rationalizations in response; it's a pointless exercise: you won't see any liquid from such turnips.
I don't see how they could ever prove that any Linux code is stolen from what they claim is theirs without the testimony of the original authors of UNIX and Linux. Even if they do present any evidence (which they haven't seem to have done so far), printed pages of code wouldn't prove anything: since the Linux code is readily available, who's to say that's not what they are presenting to the court? That is, if they remove the license header from cat.c and insert their own, then print it out and present it as Exhibit A, how can a court determine the validity of it?
How are such things proved in the digital age?
By the way, SCO ships open source stuff -- aren't they in violation of the GPL in some way? Seems like good fodder for a countersuit.
A perfect example of how non-user friendly Windows is the way your keyboard focus gets stolen. I touch type - I don't spend a lot of time looking at the screen - i end up get very, very irritated because some window/dialog has decided to open and steal the keyboard focus - at best, my keystrokes end up in a black hole, at worst - they're invoking some action that I don't want to do.
What really sucks, is when you are doing something really important like playing a game of speed chess online, when that ^*(%&! Windows Update dialog pops up and steals the focus, effectively losing the game for you. Arrrgh!
As far as usability testing goes, I just finished working on a project for the last year or so that had all kinds of usability and focus group done for it. The result was probably the most unusable UI I have ever had the shame to be associated with. I started getting tunnel carpal when trying to test my components, because the main framework of the app was done without any keyboard shortcuts at all. There were about five different artifices for doing the same thing (buttons, tabs, tabs in tabs, expanding "button menus", etc.) without any clear reason why one method was used in one case and another elsewhere.
I think the problem is when you hire a lot of expensive "usability expert" consultants, they feel some obligation to produce something nifty and different (rather than, for example, just telling you to do common sense things like provide standard menus (File, Edit, View, Help) and common keyboard shortcuts, etc. Then, in a complimentary fashion, those who have shelled out the huges bucks for the experts would be foolish to disregard their suggestions (that would be a waste of money, right? Wrong! That is the definition of a sunk cost.).
Had the thing been designed cleanly and simply, using well-established standards, it would be easier to program and easier to use.
Re:Does certification actually matter?
on
JCert Is Dead
·
· Score: 1
Not only that, but I think it is pretty silly to have a programming test that doesn't involve programming. Stupid things like trying to find the syntax error in the code without using the compiler, figuring out what the heck kind of mess a combination of different nested layouts will produce and remembering that adding two chars (in Java) produces an int. An experienced programmer types in fewer syntax errors and thus doesn't need to grep for them in code; in any case the compiler usually gives good clues.
Having gotten the Java Certified Programmer certification, I can tell you that of the languages I know (Assembly, C, C++, Java, C#, Python, JavaScript...), I am perhaps weakest in Java (I haven't done much assembly in a while, though, so that may be a toss up). I got the certification to try and spruce up my resume and compensate for the fact that I have years of exeperience in most of these other languages, but not Java.
So, perhaps a certification is a red flag that that can warn the interviewer that something real may be missing.
Slashdot Mirror
It also seems strange that the text of the patents is always very specific and detailed, but in application (of the ubiquitous lawsuits), they try for a very general all-encompassing interpretation. What is the basis for that? And why are they not immediately tossed out of court without further consideration?
My first girlfriend had this functionality! Perhaps she patented it, because my wife doesn't seem to...
I think you don't quite understand his character, which seems pretty clear from the article (and some others). You ask the same things of a chronic spammer, or a pimp with an expectation of similar rationalizations in response; it's a pointless exercise: you won't see any liquid from such turnips.
How are such things proved in the digital age?
By the way, SCO ships open source stuff -- aren't they in violation of the GPL in some way? Seems like good fodder for a countersuit.
What really sucks, is when you are doing something really important like playing a game of speed chess online, when that ^*(%&! Windows Update dialog pops up and steals the focus, effectively losing the game for you. Arrrgh!
As far as usability testing goes, I just finished working on a project for the last year or so that had all kinds of usability and focus group done for it. The result was probably the most unusable UI I have ever had the shame to be associated with. I started getting tunnel carpal when trying to test my components, because the main framework of the app was done without any keyboard shortcuts at all. There were about five different artifices for doing the same thing (buttons, tabs, tabs in tabs, expanding "button menus", etc.) without any clear reason why one method was used in one case and another elsewhere.
I think the problem is when you hire a lot of expensive "usability expert" consultants, they feel some obligation to produce something nifty and different (rather than, for example, just telling you to do common sense things like provide standard menus (File, Edit, View, Help) and common keyboard shortcuts, etc. Then, in a complimentary fashion, those who have shelled out the huges bucks for the experts would be foolish to disregard their suggestions (that would be a waste of money, right? Wrong! That is the definition of a sunk cost.).
Had the thing been designed cleanly and simply, using well-established standards, it would be easier to program and easier to use.
Having gotten the Java Certified Programmer certification, I can tell you that of the languages I know (Assembly, C, C++, Java, C#, Python, JavaScript...), I am perhaps weakest in Java (I haven't done much assembly in a while, though, so that may be a toss up). I got the certification to try and spruce up my resume and compensate for the fact that I have years of exeperience in most of these other languages, but not Java.
So, perhaps a certification is a red flag that that can warn the interviewer that something real may be missing.
And, on top of that, he used too damned many, commas.