Because it was all on news at the time. There were no need to leak anything.
Try to dig up the archives of older NTV. The culmination of the war was when Russian army used the Smerch(?) to level the Grozny, capilal of Chechnya, with the ground - along with dozens thousands civilians who hadn't escaped yet. That was actually why the NTV was disembodied by Russian state. The war was used back then to help Putin to win popularity and come into power in what appeared to be a democratic fashion.
That's is likely out-dated info, but MS didn't published spec of RTF with table support. Note that WordPad also doesn't support tables in the RTF.
It is impossible to support RTF fully simply because it is defined as "whatever WinWord writes". Pretty much the same mess as other MS-created file formats.
When OpenOffice has an Outlook equivalent, it will be a contender.
Outlook. Rivaled only by the PowerPoint in ruining productivity.
Pretty much the best M$Exchange client - and unfortunately pretty much the worst e-mail client. Ever.
Most recent problem I will never see in any other MUA: refusal to search mail box because it is not indexed by the Excahnge and Windows search (oops, why ever) isn't accessible.
Funny, I have yet to find anyone (except me...as I just hate it) in my workplace (research institute) who does not like the new ribbon interface.
Just make sure that the people who say they like ribbon UI actually use MSOffice as anything else but Notepad replacement.
I was totally oblivious to the upgrade of MSO in my company - as I use for my needs OO.o anyway. Even compared to the older versions, for technical documentation latter is superior (after disabling all the annoyances, obviously). When it comes to the official internal documents (and internal Wiki may note be used) I still have to go with MSO.
It pain me every time I sit with others writing/correcting a document to wait for them to walk through the whole ribbon thing to find an option or a button. Before they had to simply move mouse over the toolbar and read the tool-tips.
and I admit that it's quite a bit larger than I thought
That should have been expected. Embedded systems are not that powerful thus it is pretty common for standard libraries to include lots of small utility stuff, specifically optimized for the platform.
I didn't expect to see java.sql there.
Scrolling a bit, one can see that SQLite is included. That is also quite good decision to provide developers with familiar framework for the storage needs.
And if Google decides to fight (they have no choice really) how many of the patents are going to be invalidated as obvious/having prior art? Probably all of them. (I wonder if Oracle considered that potential outcome.)
correct me please if i am wrong but I thought Android was a Linux based OS, and when you develop for android you are told to use the J2SE JDK, not ME JDK. I'm having trouble understanding how Oracle even has a case.
Android uses Dalvik VM which is a direct competitor to Java ME.
Java SE SDK is used only for development, because that what every developer can easily get off the net - compared to the Java ME. Yet, in the end the apps get retargeted to Dalvik VM.
My reading of the reports was that Oracle tries via court to enforce that Dalvik is an unauthorized fork of the Java ME.
I understand the concerns regarding Mono, but C# is what I work with, and am slightly taken aback that I seem to be using something that people perceive as being poisonous.
Well, GPL is viral -.Net is poisonous. So we are square;)
I'm fine as long as people know that they have choice.
I don't enjoy coding C++ and what I have seen of Java has not enamoured me. Am I an open source outcast?
For C++ most of the time Qt does the job for me. (Admittedly I do little of GUI development myself.) And for many others too. Some companies I know have picked Qt simply because they did want to have some freedom in development tools and also the optional portability.
I do feel sorry for him though, with all the venom directed against him!
He promotes technology with open source implementation, but generally avoid talking that it is tangled with MSFT patents.
What software project would love that kind of submarine strategy from a SDK?
So it is Mono that everyone hates?
For Linux folks, Mono is... what was that again? Nobody cares.
For Windows developers, Mono is the future of Linux. (No kidding, can quote at least two C# devs on that. Poor chaps, never seen anything different - and refuse to look.)
So I built myself a new PC and thought that it's time to move on and bought the W7.
Largely disappointed.
Aero is nice and all, but the themes are generally unusable due to semi-transparent title bar. And it is noticeably slower compared to the basic theme and sometimes produces annoying flashing effects when restoring minimized window. Neither colors/fonts can be customized. Huh? Basic theme colors are hard coded - though even XP's Luna came with several color schemes (blue, silver, olive - now only the light blue). UI overall is a let down: Aero is fancy but unusable, Basic theme is too bright, Classic theme conflicts with bunch of applications since they assume "W7 == Aero/Basic." Heck, even Mac OS X has choice of blue vs. graphite themes and the default colors and effects aren't that eye irritating.
They have also f***ed up Control Panel. In XP/before I didn't need the search function there - now I have to use it all the time because CP was apparently designed by some clowns and finding there something is like looking for a tree in forest. The CP's applets also have the nasty habit to open to the whole screen: lots of white space for 2-3 options in the middle look ridiculous.
Explorer (file manager) finally caught up with Mac OS X's Finder - but lost many customizations and flexibility in the process. Folder properties are as buggy as ever and Windows oftentimes decides to forget my folder options and show that it knows better how the folder should be displayed. In XP I used both Explorer and alternative file manager - but in W7 there is little to no choice but to use an alternative file manager exclusively.
Desktop gadgets are great idea executed horribly. Standard gadgets are all show off (orange(!!! ) date gadget?? really???), uncustomizable and barely usable - unless you want to drill a hole in your eyes. Finding a decent unobtrusive gadget for a task is like digging see of sh*t with a tee spoon - hopeless. Gallery on Live is flooded with junk, lacking screenshots or even simple description what gadget actually does.
Keyboard shortcuts for the task bar probably the sole place which I would say has improved. But only because Windows lagged so much behind the Macs and Linux in the department. And Windows in the respect is still behind both Mac OS and Linux.
Looking back at the month I'm on the W7, I frankly can't get what the reviewers were so hyped about. Was Vista really that bad? Or could it be that the free laptop give away really helped??
P.S. And tray icons now rearranged in a confusing way...
The average American doesn't realize how much of the laws are written by lobbyists'
I'm not sure about how it supposed to actually work in US, but who else is supposed to write laws?
Gov't is largely reactive force - not proactive. If you come to them with a complain - they'd try to resolve it. If you come to them with a law - they'd try to pass it. That's how it actually works. N.B. Would be glad if anybody can enlighten me how it supposed to work.
'Technology is fundamentally disruptive.' Mobile phones and personal technology, for example, could be used to record the bills that members of Congress actually read and then determine what stimulus funds were successfully spent."
Disruptive technology wouldn't help with the law making. From the corruption insights into Russian gov't I heard that to write a law costs around $2.5-10Mln (not including the actual bribes required to pass the law). And the Russia is a simple state as whole power is concentrated in the Kremlin. Laws became intricately sophisticated, where one needs to pay attention to the existing laws/etc. On the federal level that surely is made more tangled by the local state laws.
Unless Google/friends come up with disruptive technology to take out the main costs out of the law making, I do not think anything would change.
They can go a bit disruptive and create and maintain free/open system to analyze and search the legal documents. I heard the systems exists already but cost *beep*load of money.
Should I bother to reply when you haven't bothered to read what you respond to?
Console manufacturers on the other side do intentionally limit the rights of software developers using the SDKs. And as can be seen the ways are many.
While MS makes sure that the program you create using its development tools belongs 100% to you, console manufacturers do it other way around: (1) make sure that the program embeds part of SDK and (2) limit redistribution rights (e.g. give SDK license only to few selected publishers) using the copyright for the embedded part. IOW resulting program isn't copyrighted only by the game developer - it is also automatically copyrighted by the console/SDK manufacturer.
Torrenting it and then distributing code compiled with it both are
So, if I use MS Visual Studio to compile MY code, somehow that is a violation of THEIR copyright.
It tells me that you actually never released a single program. By "released" I of course mean package it and sell it to people.
Because if you ever did, you would have known that MS has so called redistributable run-time libraries covered by special license, allowing you to deliver the piece of MS proprietary libraries along your own program. Because the proper version of run-time is required to run the final program - and user isn't guaranteed to have it install. That's why you have to ship it with your program.
And the fonts. Probably the only thing ever I could praise the MS sincerely: break the iron grip of font foundries on the market. All fonts MS delivers with Windows can be used by 3rd party software, can be redistributed to any other Windows version, etc. To my knowledge MS was first who bothered to buy a bunch of fonts with all right for its OS - and extend some of the rights to software developers. Because before 3rd party software developers had to fork money to font foundries if they wanted to redistribute (or even use installed) the fonts with their programs.
Console manufacturers on the other side do intentionally limit the rights of software developers using the SDKs. And as can be seen the ways are many.
Proper comparison would be "glibc is viral". Many game SDK have redistributable part which has to go along with the game/incorporates itself in the final product. GNU/FSF/etc works also incorporate special provisions which establish the boundary between your (potentially proprietary work) and the work of GNU/FSF/etc which was used to create it. Thanks to great attention to licensing in the Linux world, most of the time it is a very clean cut: here is my code, there - not mine. On consoles that traditionally was different (and I think in part intentionally) to have the final products to incorporate large chunk of code owned by the manufacturer. This way Sony and Nintendo have to be a part of any game publishing deal - and there is no way around it.
So if GPL/glibc (or GCC with its libgcc_s.so) might be viewed as viral, they also contain clean provisions revolving around making sure that final product belongs to its producer and may not be limited in its distribution by glibc or gcc authors.
Consoles SDKs are the opposite: they intentionally contaminate final products, to allow the control over its distribution.
And that is easy to explain: if Valve would manage to build a good Linux porting team and there would be no major problems with the ports, then they might start releasing something.
But if they hiring now, then I guess one would have to wait 2+ years before any results materialize.
Slashdot Mirror
What's more, if US mass media to be believed, the crazy people appear out of a thin air!!!
Because it was all on news at the time. There were no need to leak anything.
Try to dig up the archives of older NTV. The culmination of the war was when Russian army used the Smerch(?) to level the Grozny, capilal of Chechnya, with the ground - along with dozens thousands civilians who hadn't escaped yet. That was actually why the NTV was disembodied by Russian state. The war was used back then to help Putin to win popularity and come into power in what appeared to be a democratic fashion.
Let me rephrase: the war fuels the terrorist attacks against the US.
How can we tell truth from lies?
Find a historian specializing in the WWI or WWII - and he would tell that are pretty common events for a war.
Looting. Rape. Killing. This is normal. This is what war looks like up close.
Short glance through the articles reminded me of few things my grand-father were telling about WWII (who fought on Russia's side).
Over time I have developed the opinion that glorification of a war is the sign of corrupt and evil state.
That's is likely out-dated info, but MS didn't published spec of RTF with table support. Note that WordPad also doesn't support tables in the RTF.
It is impossible to support RTF fully simply because it is defined as "whatever WinWord writes". Pretty much the same mess as other MS-created file formats.
When OpenOffice has an Outlook equivalent, it will be a contender.
Outlook. Rivaled only by the PowerPoint in ruining productivity.
Pretty much the best M$Exchange client - and unfortunately pretty much the worst e-mail client. Ever.
Most recent problem I will never see in any other MUA: refusal to search mail box because it is not indexed by the Excahnge and Windows search (oops, why ever) isn't accessible.
Funny, I have yet to find anyone (except me...as I just hate it) in my workplace (research institute) who does not like the new ribbon interface.
Just make sure that the people who say they like ribbon UI actually use MSOffice as anything else but Notepad replacement.
I was totally oblivious to the upgrade of MSO in my company - as I use for my needs OO.o anyway. Even compared to the older versions, for technical documentation latter is superior (after disabling all the annoyances, obviously). When it comes to the official internal documents (and internal Wiki may note be used) I still have to go with MSO.
It pain me every time I sit with others writing/correcting a document to wait for them to walk through the whole ribbon thing to find an option or a button. Before they had to simply move mouse over the toolbar and read the tool-tips.
and I admit that it's quite a bit larger than I thought
That should have been expected. Embedded systems are not that powerful thus it is pretty common for standard libraries to include lots of small utility stuff, specifically optimized for the platform.
I didn't expect to see java.sql there.
Scrolling a bit, one can see that SQLite is included. That is also quite good decision to provide developers with familiar framework for the storage needs.
And if Google decides to fight (they have no choice really) how many of the patents are going to be invalidated as obvious/having prior art? Probably all of them. (I wonder if Oracle considered that potential outcome.)
correct me please if i am wrong but I thought Android was a Linux based OS, and when you develop for android you are told to use the J2SE JDK, not ME JDK. I'm having trouble understanding how Oracle even has a case.
Android uses Dalvik VM which is a direct competitor to Java ME.
Java SE SDK is used only for development, because that what every developer can easily get off the net - compared to the Java ME. Yet, in the end the apps get retargeted to Dalvik VM.
My reading of the reports was that Oracle tries via court to enforce that Dalvik is an unauthorized fork of the Java ME.
I understand the concerns regarding Mono, but C# is what I work with, and am slightly taken aback that I seem to be using something that people perceive as being poisonous.
Well, GPL is viral - .Net is poisonous. So we are square ;)
I'm fine as long as people know that they have choice.
I don't enjoy coding C++ and what I have seen of Java has not enamoured me. Am I an open source outcast?
For C++ most of the time Qt does the job for me. (Admittedly I do little of GUI development myself.) And for many others too. Some companies I know have picked Qt simply because they did want to have some freedom in development tools and also the optional portability.
I do feel sorry for him though, with all the venom directed against him!
He promotes technology with open source implementation, but generally avoid talking that it is tangled with MSFT patents.
What software project would love that kind of submarine strategy from a SDK?
So it is Mono that everyone hates?
For Linux folks, Mono is ... what was that again? Nobody cares.
For Windows developers, Mono is the future of Linux. (No kidding, can quote at least two C# devs on that. Poor chaps, never seen anything different - and refuse to look.)
Rekonq is too WebKit based but integrates with KDE.
Linux is the only operating system where I have to wait a couple of hours during boot for it to do a fsck.
You do not have have to. (And hours it might take only on non-journaled ext2 - on ext3 it is pretty fast.)
That is easily disabled with tune2fs. Look for options -i and -c.
Though personally I prefer to leave the options on: I feel safer to know that file system is checked time after time.
So I built myself a new PC and thought that it's time to move on and bought the W7.
Largely disappointed.
Aero is nice and all, but the themes are generally unusable due to semi-transparent title bar. And it is noticeably slower compared to the basic theme and sometimes produces annoying flashing effects when restoring minimized window. Neither colors/fonts can be customized. Huh? Basic theme colors are hard coded - though even XP's Luna came with several color schemes (blue, silver, olive - now only the light blue). UI overall is a let down: Aero is fancy but unusable, Basic theme is too bright, Classic theme conflicts with bunch of applications since they assume "W7 == Aero/Basic." Heck, even Mac OS X has choice of blue vs. graphite themes and the default colors and effects aren't that eye irritating.
They have also f***ed up Control Panel. In XP/before I didn't need the search function there - now I have to use it all the time because CP was apparently designed by some clowns and finding there something is like looking for a tree in forest. The CP's applets also have the nasty habit to open to the whole screen: lots of white space for 2-3 options in the middle look ridiculous.
Explorer (file manager) finally caught up with Mac OS X's Finder - but lost many customizations and flexibility in the process. Folder properties are as buggy as ever and Windows oftentimes decides to forget my folder options and show that it knows better how the folder should be displayed. In XP I used both Explorer and alternative file manager - but in W7 there is little to no choice but to use an alternative file manager exclusively.
Desktop gadgets are great idea executed horribly. Standard gadgets are all show off (orange(!!! ) date gadget?? really???), uncustomizable and barely usable - unless you want to drill a hole in your eyes. Finding a decent unobtrusive gadget for a task is like digging see of sh*t with a tee spoon - hopeless. Gallery on Live is flooded with junk, lacking screenshots or even simple description what gadget actually does.
Keyboard shortcuts for the task bar probably the sole place which I would say has improved. But only because Windows lagged so much behind the Macs and Linux in the department. And Windows in the respect is still behind both Mac OS and Linux.
Looking back at the month I'm on the W7, I frankly can't get what the reviewers were so hyped about. Was Vista really that bad? Or could it be that the free laptop give away really helped??
P.S. And tray icons now rearranged in a confusing way...
The average American doesn't realize how much of the laws are written by lobbyists'
I'm not sure about how it supposed to actually work in US, but who else is supposed to write laws?
Gov't is largely reactive force - not proactive. If you come to them with a complain - they'd try to resolve it. If you come to them with a law - they'd try to pass it. That's how it actually works. N.B. Would be glad if anybody can enlighten me how it supposed to work.
'Technology is fundamentally disruptive.' Mobile phones and personal technology, for example, could be used to record the bills that members of Congress actually read and then determine what stimulus funds were successfully spent."
Disruptive technology wouldn't help with the law making. From the corruption insights into Russian gov't I heard that to write a law costs around $2.5-10Mln (not including the actual bribes required to pass the law). And the Russia is a simple state as whole power is concentrated in the Kremlin. Laws became intricately sophisticated, where one needs to pay attention to the existing laws/etc. On the federal level that surely is made more tangled by the local state laws.
Unless Google/friends come up with disruptive technology to take out the main costs out of the law making, I do not think anything would change.
They can go a bit disruptive and create and maintain free/open system to analyze and search the legal documents. I heard the systems exists already but cost *beep*load of money.
Should I bother to reply when you haven't bothered to read what you respond to?
Console manufacturers on the other side do intentionally limit the rights of software developers using the SDKs. And as can be seen the ways are many.
While MS makes sure that the program you create using its development tools belongs 100% to you, console manufacturers do it other way around: (1) make sure that the program embeds part of SDK and (2) limit redistribution rights (e.g. give SDK license only to few selected publishers) using the copyright for the embedded part. IOW resulting program isn't copyrighted only by the game developer - it is also automatically copyrighted by the console/SDK manufacturer.
there is ONE version of the PS3, no more, no less
Are you living on the moon?
Wow - using an SDK is piracy?
Torrenting it and then distributing code compiled with it both are
So, if I use MS Visual Studio to compile MY code, somehow that is a violation of THEIR copyright.
It tells me that you actually never released a single program. By "released" I of course mean package it and sell it to people.
Because if you ever did, you would have known that MS has so called redistributable run-time libraries covered by special license, allowing you to deliver the piece of MS proprietary libraries along your own program. Because the proper version of run-time is required to run the final program - and user isn't guaranteed to have it install. That's why you have to ship it with your program.
And the fonts. Probably the only thing ever I could praise the MS sincerely: break the iron grip of font foundries on the market. All fonts MS delivers with Windows can be used by 3rd party software, can be redistributed to any other Windows version, etc. To my knowledge MS was first who bothered to buy a bunch of fonts with all right for its OS - and extend some of the rights to software developers. Because before 3rd party software developers had to fork money to font foundries if they wanted to redistribute (or even use installed) the fonts with their programs.
Console manufacturers on the other side do intentionally limit the rights of software developers using the SDKs. And as can be seen the ways are many.
Proper comparison would be "glibc is viral". Many game SDK have redistributable part which has to go along with the game/incorporates itself in the final product. GNU/FSF/etc works also incorporate special provisions which establish the boundary between your (potentially proprietary work) and the work of GNU/FSF/etc which was used to create it. Thanks to great attention to licensing in the Linux world, most of the time it is a very clean cut: here is my code, there - not mine. On consoles that traditionally was different (and I think in part intentionally) to have the final products to incorporate large chunk of code owned by the manufacturer. This way Sony and Nintendo have to be a part of any game publishing deal - and there is no way around it.
So if GPL/glibc (or GCC with its libgcc_s.so) might be viewed as viral, they also contain clean provisions revolving around making sure that final product belongs to its producer and may not be limited in its distribution by glibc or gcc authors.
Consoles SDKs are the opposite: they intentionally contaminate final products, to allow the control over its distribution.
For the whole time (~two years) I watch The Daily Show and The Colbert Report, I had impression that the folks simply know too well the saying:
A lie repeated often becomes truth.
And they simply feel obliged to respond and show the absurdity.
Wrong. PowerPoint presentations are the only entertainment during the dead meetings.
And that is easy to explain: if Valve would manage to build a good Linux porting team and there would be no major problems with the ports, then they might start releasing something.
But if they hiring now, then I guess one would have to wait 2+ years before any results materialize.
I'm talking about your rights as a consumer and your rights online.
In the free market USA, the rights have the consumers!
P.S. Cue the DMCA: especially the on-line consumers.
Because application developers, not Windows, are to blame
Because clean design of many Windows APIs inspires secure coding practices.
And MS has totally nothing to do with the fact that some of the APIs are so developer-friendly.
[/sarcasm]