If they aren't providing an upgrade from 3.x devices, then I would hope that OS 4.0 apps are binary compatible with the old 3.x OS.
In general, applications developed against the 4.0 SDK can work on older Palm's - even palms as old as 2.0 - provided that the programmer does not use API calls that only exist in PalmOS 4.0.
Apps that I have developed run on any OS from 2.0 up. If I want to take advantage of newer API features, I use run-time OS version checks before using that feature, and either work around the missing feature in the older OS, or don't provide the functionality that requires the newer API.
This requires some discipline on the part of the programmer, and you will see applications that won't run on older versions of PalmOS, if those applications use 4.0 API calls. Of all of the OSes that I have programmed against, PalmOS actually seems to provide the best compatibility for newer software running on older devices.
The only problem with debian changelogs is that they are by definition, the changelog for the debian package, not necessarily the changelog for the software that the package encapsulates. All too often, the changelog just says "New upstream release", which says nothing about what makes this new release interesting or what could bite you hard.
If you remove regulations from the marketplace, wages and quality of life for the underpriveleged will fall faster than teenage lady garment workers onto a hot New York sidewalk.
This is a good one. I was looking for one having to do with burning women in a locked chicken processing plant, but couldn't make the words come right.
Unfortunately people think that government is the solution to any situation they see as 'unfair', when they have their own ability to correct the problem by not dealing with the perpetrator of the 'unfair'ness.
Bull. Do you think that employers follow the 40-hour work week voluntarily? They do it because the government tells them to. And if the government didn't tell them to do that, then they wouldn't, because the simple fact of the matter is that most people don't have the luxury of just quitting their job and taking another one, and employers know this.
Take for example an average small town resident working at the local auto shop. Lets say that the managers of the 2 auto shops in town get together and start slowly increasing their employees' required hours until, a couple of years later, the mechanics find that they're working 6 days a week from 8am to 6pm.
What choice does one of these mechanics really have? The only way he can change jobs is to uproot his family, leave his extended family and friends behind (and his wife's family and friends, and his kids' friends) and move to a different town. While the objectivists and the libertarians argue that this is what will happen, the reality is that this is an expensive price to pay for most people. Employers are fully aware that they have the balance of power in an employee/employer relationship, and they would leverage that power if they could.
Historically, abuse of laborers has been common. For a real example, look at the coal mining towns at the turn of the century, where if you worked for the company, they pretty much owed you. You bought your house from the company (the payments were taken out of your paycheck). You bought your food and clothes from the company. If you were lucky, then maybe you saved up enough money to send one of your children to university and out of the mining town. You certainly never had enough money to actually move your entire family away, so it was either work for the company or watch your family starve.
It was labor unions, and their pressures on government, that brought in fair employment regulations; it certainly wasn't done by the companies themselves. Their optimal economic strategy was the exploitation their workers, and the only reason that strategy didn't remain optimal was because of government intervention in the form of labor standards.
In any case, these are computer programmers and technical types - it's not as though they are working making footballs in the third world for tuppence happeny a day, is it?
What makes you think they're techies? Do you believe that of the 42,000 people working for Microsoft, 41,999 are techies, with maybe 1 other person to answer the phones?
The article doesn't give any numbers, but I would bet that most of these permatemps are not techies, but secretaries and support staff, who do not have as many options when it comes to seeking employment.
To see how the new chip perform we will have to wait for neutral benchmarks. Perhaps it will not beat the Athlon clock by clock, but it will start with 1.5 GHz und will scale well beyond 2 Ghz this will make it the performance leader for some time.
So I take it that you've already seen the neutral benchmarks and already know that it is the performance leader?
If you had bothered to read the articles, you would know why: Like the original Rosetta Stone, the disk will take a single text and record translations in many languages and scripts. Our goal is as many currently extant languages as possible. For the core text, we are leaning towards combination of creation myths - from Genesis to the Big-Bang.
Stop and think for just a second before flying off the handle. You're giving the rest of us atheists a bad name.
I have heard time and time again that Microsoft's integration of IE was of benefit to consumers and that they should not have been found a monopoly for that.
However, the fact remains that Microsoft is a monopoly and this monopoly is causing harm to consumers. In order to intervene in this situation, the government first has prove that Microsoft is a monopoly. They chose to pursue the IE integration angle because it was relatively easy to prove that IE integration harmed competitors and leveraged Microsoft's monopoly power.
Similarly, when the government sent Al Capone to jail, they did it with tax evasion laws, because it was much easier to get him on tax evasion than on his other crimes. The end result is the same, Al Capone was a criminal and Al Capone went to jail.
The end result for Microsoft will be the same: Microsoft is a monopoly, and there will be remedies applied to address this problem.
When the recent lawsuit against AOL was posted on Slashdot, some very common themes in the responses were "should the net be run by lawyers?" and "let market forces provide access instead of some bureaucrat!". (Not to mention the "blind people can't surf anyway!")
In this article, the common theme seems to be that "those evil lawyers for BigCo are discriminatory", and "there oughtta be a law, because it's obvious that market forces aren't helping people with disabilities".
Maybe it's just a different group of people reading and responding to the two articles?
I made a point of going to Phillip Island when I was in Melbourne a couple of months ago, just to see the penguins. I froze my butt off on the beach right after sundown, but it was worth it to see them all march up the beach and head for their nests--one of the highlights of the trip. I even have a little stuffed fairy pengin gracing my monitor right now.
The original URL has directions on where to send the donations. And, if you're in the US, your US dollars go a long way in Aus. dollars:-)
Doubleclick? Doubleclick? I'm trying to remember who they are. Lemme look in my hosts file... oh yeah. They're those guys at 127.0.0.1 whose banners never seem to load correctly. Oh well.
Beside the point, this is all just Darwinism anyway. I don't necessarily think we should be trying to prevent all these deaths. Educate the people and let them decide for themselves. Darwinism only applies if the people die before they are allowed to reproduce. Deaths due to cigarette-induced disease rarely occur until long after the deceased has produced all the offspring he/she desires. Thus, if propensity to smoke is genetic, the children inherit that propensity.
Actually, science never proves anything. Proof belongs in the realm of mathematics. All science can do is continue to gather evidence that supports a theory. Some theories have so much supporting evidence that many people just call them facts, but scientists are always careful to refer to them as theories.
It's a fact that things fall. The theory of gravity tries to explains why. It's a fact that populations evolve (i.e. change over time). Theories of evolution try to explain the mechanics.
As for the theory of creation, they can't really be called theories, because none of them seem to have any predictive value, which is one of the most important uses of a theory. If you can't use the theory to predict things, you can't set up an experiment to try to falsify the prediction.
On the other hand, if the theory makes predictions, and the experiments don't ever falsify the predictions, then the theory continues to gain supporting evidence. After a while, people just start to say "fact".
Big-O (order) notation is a way of representing the speed of an algorithm. For example O(n) says that the speed of execution is directly proportional to the amount of data (n) being processed. O(n^2) says that it's proportional to the square of the amount of data, so that if you double the data, you're actually quadrupling the processing time. The first thing to do when evaluating any algorithm is to evalaute the order. If it's O(n^2) or worse, dump the algorithm. O(n log n) is nice, O(n) is nicer, and O(log n) is nicest.
You'll get conflicting advice on this. The doctrine of dual intent currently doesn't preclude going from TN to green card, but it doesn't actively endorse it. Check out Grasmick.com for lots of good info.
This is true. I saw a documentary on this on Undercurrents about a month ago that Disney was quietly lobbying congress to do this. The real irony is that Disney has made a lot of money exploiting works whose copyright has run out - Jungle Book, Hunchback, Little Mermaid, Winnie the Pooh, etc. Now they're using that money to prevent the same laws that benefitted them from benefitting others.
Maybe the Southern Baptists were on to something after all - boycott Disney!
Slashdot Mirror
If they aren't providing an upgrade from 3.x devices, then I would hope that OS 4.0 apps are binary compatible with the old 3.x OS.
In general, applications developed against the 4.0 SDK can work on older Palm's - even palms as old as 2.0 - provided that the programmer does not use API calls that only exist in PalmOS 4.0.
Apps that I have developed run on any OS from 2.0 up. If I want to take advantage of newer API features, I use run-time OS version checks before using that feature, and either work around the missing feature in the older OS, or don't provide the functionality that requires the newer API.
This requires some discipline on the part of the programmer, and you will see applications that won't run on older versions of PalmOS, if those applications use 4.0 API calls. Of all of the OSes that I have programmed against, PalmOS actually seems to provide the best compatibility for newer software running on older devices.
The only problem with debian changelogs is that they are by definition, the changelog for the debian package, not necessarily the changelog for the software that the package encapsulates. All too often, the changelog just says "New upstream release", which says nothing about what makes this new release interesting or what could bite you hard.
If you remove regulations from the marketplace, wages and quality of life for the underpriveleged will fall faster than teenage lady garment workers onto a hot New York sidewalk.
This is a good one. I was looking for one having to do with burning women in a locked chicken processing plant, but couldn't make the words come right.
Unfortunately people think that government is the solution to any situation they see as 'unfair', when they have their own ability to correct the problem by not dealing with the perpetrator of the 'unfair'ness.
Bull. Do you think that employers follow the 40-hour work week voluntarily? They do it because the government tells them to. And if the government didn't tell them to do that, then they wouldn't, because the simple fact of the matter is that most people don't have the luxury of just quitting their job and taking another one, and employers know this.
Take for example an average small town resident working at the local auto shop. Lets say that the managers of the 2 auto shops in town get together and start slowly increasing their employees' required hours until, a couple of years later, the mechanics find that they're working 6 days a week from 8am to 6pm.
What choice does one of these mechanics really have? The only way he can change jobs is to uproot his family, leave his extended family and friends behind (and his wife's family and friends, and his kids' friends) and move to a different town. While the objectivists and the libertarians argue that this is what will happen, the reality is that this is an expensive price to pay for most people. Employers are fully aware that they have the balance of power in an employee/employer relationship, and they would leverage that power if they could.
Historically, abuse of laborers has been common. For a real example, look at the coal mining towns at the turn of the century, where if you worked for the company, they pretty much owed you. You bought your house from the company (the payments were taken out of your paycheck). You bought your food and clothes from the company. If you were lucky, then maybe you saved up enough money to send one of your children to university and out of the mining town. You certainly never had enough money to actually move your entire family away, so it was either work for the company or watch your family starve.
It was labor unions, and their pressures on government, that brought in fair employment regulations; it certainly wasn't done by the companies themselves. Their optimal economic strategy was the exploitation their workers, and the only reason that strategy didn't remain optimal was because of government intervention in the form of labor standards.
Go read Ayn Rand, you'll thank me later.
I have. She's full of shit.
In any case, these are computer programmers and technical types - it's not as though they are working making footballs in the third world for tuppence happeny a day, is it?
What makes you think they're techies? Do you believe that of the 42,000 people working for Microsoft, 41,999 are techies, with maybe 1 other person to answer the phones?
The article doesn't give any numbers, but I would bet that most of these permatemps are not techies, but secretaries and support staff, who do not have as many options when it comes to seeking employment.
To see how the new chip perform we will have to wait for neutral benchmarks. Perhaps it will not beat the Athlon clock by clock, but it will start with 1.5 GHz und will scale well beyond 2 Ghz this will make it the performance leader for some time.
So I take it that you've already seen the neutral benchmarks and already know that it is the performance leader?
If you had bothered to read the articles, you would know why: Like the original Rosetta Stone, the disk will take a single text and record translations in many languages and scripts. Our goal is as many currently extant languages as possible. For the core text, we are leaning towards combination of creation myths - from Genesis to the Big-Bang.
Stop and think for just a second before flying off the handle. You're giving the rest of us atheists a bad name.
I have heard time and time again that Microsoft's integration of IE was of benefit to consumers and that they should not have been found a monopoly for that.
However, the fact remains that Microsoft is a monopoly and this monopoly is causing harm to consumers. In order to intervene in this situation, the government first has prove that Microsoft is a monopoly. They chose to pursue the IE integration angle because it was relatively easy to prove that IE integration harmed competitors and leveraged Microsoft's monopoly power.
Similarly, when the government sent Al Capone to jail, they did it with tax evasion laws, because it was much easier to get him on tax evasion than on his other crimes. The end result is the same, Al Capone was a criminal and Al Capone went to jail.
The end result for Microsoft will be the same: Microsoft is a monopoly, and there will be remedies applied to address this problem.
When the recent lawsuit against AOL was posted on Slashdot, some very common themes in the responses were "should the net be run by lawyers?" and "let market forces provide access instead of some bureaucrat!". (Not to mention the "blind people can't surf anyway!")
In this article, the common theme seems to be that "those evil lawyers for BigCo are discriminatory", and "there oughtta be a law, because it's obvious that market forces aren't helping people with disabilities".
Maybe it's just a different group of people reading and responding to the two articles?
I made a point of going to Phillip Island when I was in Melbourne a couple of months ago, just to see the penguins. I froze my butt off on the beach right after sundown, but it was worth it to see them all march up the beach and head for their nests--one of the highlights of the trip. I even have a little stuffed fairy pengin gracing my monitor right now.
:-)
The original URL has directions on where to send the donations. And, if you're in the US, your US dollars go a long way in Aus. dollars
Actually, there were actual securities up for auction on ebay once, a few months ago. The SEC put a very rapid stop to that.
Doubleclick? Doubleclick? I'm trying to remember who they are. Lemme look in my hosts file... oh yeah. They're those guys at 127.0.0.1 whose banners never seem to load correctly. Oh well.
This is very ingenious. You should patent it.
Beside the point, this is all just Darwinism anyway. I don't necessarily think we should be trying to prevent all these deaths. Educate the people and let them decide for themselves.
Darwinism only applies if the people die before they are allowed to reproduce. Deaths due to cigarette-induced disease rarely occur until long after the deceased has produced all the offspring he/she desires. Thus, if propensity to smoke is genetic, the children inherit that propensity.
Actually, science never proves anything. Proof belongs in the realm of mathematics. All science can do is continue to gather evidence that supports a theory. Some theories have so much supporting evidence that many people just call them facts, but scientists are always careful to refer to them as theories.
It's a fact that things fall. The theory of gravity tries to explains why. It's a fact that populations evolve (i.e. change over time). Theories of evolution try to explain the mechanics.
As for the theory of creation, they can't really be called theories, because none of them seem to have any predictive value, which is one of the most important uses of a theory. If you can't use the theory to predict things, you can't set up an experiment to try to falsify the prediction.
On the other hand, if the theory makes predictions, and the experiments don't ever falsify the predictions, then the theory continues to gain supporting evidence. After a while, people just start to say "fact".
Big-O (order) notation is a way of representing the speed of an algorithm. For example O(n) says that the speed of execution is directly proportional to the amount of data (n) being processed. O(n^2) says that it's proportional to the square of the amount of data, so that if you double the data, you're actually quadrupling the processing time. The first thing to do when evaluating any algorithm is to evalaute the order. If it's O(n^2) or worse, dump the algorithm. O(n log n) is nice, O(n) is nicer, and O(log n) is nicest.
You'll get conflicting advice on this. The doctrine of dual intent currently doesn't preclude going from TN to green card, but it doesn't actively endorse it. Check out Grasmick.com for lots of good info.
This is true. I saw a documentary on this on Undercurrents about a month ago that Disney was quietly lobbying congress to do this. The real irony is that Disney has made a lot of money exploiting works whose copyright has run out - Jungle Book, Hunchback, Little Mermaid, Winnie the Pooh, etc. Now they're using that money to prevent the same laws that benefitted them from benefitting others.
Maybe the Southern Baptists were on to something after all - boycott Disney!