Copyright infringement...It shouldn't even be a crime. Good thing you aren't an author of any kind. I hate the current state of copyright as much as the next guy, but saying people should be able to copy something, sell it, and claim credit for writing it is absurd.
It's compatible in that you can code something with a Java 5/Java 6 compiler, but is still runs on the Java 4 runtime. This is because they implemented generics as a language kludge rather than a true feature of the runtime. They traded performance for compatibility. Whereas with Microsoft, you can't compile something to use.NET 2.0 generics then run it on the.NET 1.1 framework.
"Our main concern is with the consumer and not a particular technology," said Kwak. If this were a real philosphy instead of marketing speak, then this particular player wouldn't support HDCP.
Do you really think that there's this enormous market of people buying replacements of DVDs that they've already bought but lost or broke? No, but there is large market of people buying the same music or video in a different format. VHS->DVD->HDDVD, Cassette->CD->iTunes, etc.
HTML is not for describing presentation, that is what CSS is for. Bad moderator! That wasn't flaimbait - that was a pertinent point about the design goals of HTML.
Choice is great. Yes, but making a choice buy ignoring certain information, such as the political decisions of the company you buy from, could shortcut your future.
Imagine if it were simpler: Suppose Company A made a great product but killed babies. And Company B made a mediocre product but saved babies. Which product would you buy? Naturally, life isn't that simple. But you can't just ignore the behavior of a company when buying their products. Every dollar you spend is a vote that money should go toward that organization. Knowing that, I don't want money going toward thes Microsofts, Novells, and SCOs of the world.
The agreement is harmless to "the community." It's an indemnity agreement! That's about the most benign thing two companies could possibly sign. Okay, so onto the subject of Novell specifically. By signing that deal, Novell is openly acknowledging that Linux infringes on Microsoft patents. And when Microsoft sues someone, they can refer to that indemnity deal as evidence that the patent is valid and that the infringement did occur. Microsoft has even openly stated that this deal is because Novell knows of such infringement. And Novell denying it is obviously a lie since there is no other reason for them to go into the deal. Novell is playing politics with someone else's intellectual property and that stinks. So no, I won't support them in it. And no, that doesn't make me a moron.
I wonder if professional spammers will attend the conference to learn how to get through the next generation of filters. Maybe it would be like playing spot the Fed at the hacker's conferences.
We, the developers of the world, are in a bad situation right now. The ideal application is a zero-deployment cross-platform GUI application. Writing such an application depends on an already deployed cross-platform framework. The problem is that the dominant platform for doing this is a cobbled together load of crap.
Which of the following is the _best_ environment to develop a zero-deployment cross-platform GUI application? 1) Java applet/Java web start 2).NET 3) HTML+CSS+Javascript+HTTP+SOAP+XML+(Python|PERL|Rub y|C#|whatever)
The last option is the slowest, most complicated, and hardest to develop for, with the fewest features, and is most brittle (changes in OS, software version, etc. may break it). Unfortunately, it is also the only one everybody has on their computer.
The reason for this is that we had several competing standards, and they all competed well enough to hold each other from gaining critical mass. And in the mean time, a mish-mash of technologies never intended for this purpose gained enough momentum that it snuck onto everyone's computer before we realized what it was. We had AJAX around for years before the general developer population realized it existed!
I don't see a way out. We are stuck with the AJAX solution unless we all decide to get together and agree to some other standard. But there is too much infighting for that to become likely. If Sun had done things differently, we would all be writing Java applications today. But it didn't work-out that way. I, for one, welcome our over-complicated AJAX development tools - since I don't really have a choice anymore.
I don't know aerodynamics very well either. But I think you are correct. When I first watched the video, my question was "why doesn't it rotate from all the torque of that motor on top?" The stator vanes (never heard that term before, but I assume that means the little things on the outside shell around it) are probably the issue. Because on a helicoptor, you need a second propellor or a tail propellor to fix that problem.
Suppose you bought an Apple car that advertised it could go 0-60 in 5 seconds, but it took 15 seconds when you drove it. Then Apple points out that you have to buy 900 octane gas for it to get that kind of acceleration, and Apple's own store doesn't sell that kind of gas! That would suck, and it is what Apple is doing.
This is very unusual for: They tend to present the OS, hardware, and services all under one brand and all ready for action at once. That is why Apple has a serious following. It is completely fair to point out that the Apple TV is billed as one thing but delivers another.
Ironically, it would be difficult to perform such a study if you had censorship. You would never know if you had looked at all aspects of it. It seems to me that science and reason cannot exist in a world where certain ideas are off limits. It would be like trying to mathematically prove the sum of the first 10 whole numbers while simultaenously banning the number 3.
The implication was that I am asking for a cite from a reputeable source. I did. What you need to do is either cite a reputable source that disagrees, or a reputable source that says Scientific American is wrong. Just saying that my source isn't reputable doesn't change the fact that I have source and you don't.
Users don't choose their OS, they choose the platform. If they chose Microsoft, then they'll get Vista eventually. The only way out is to choose *nix or Mac. And most people aren't ready to make that leap.
I bet that these things would make excellent conductors for lightning. Take them down when storms approach and put them back up afterwards? Don't do that! That's 1.21 jigawatts of electricity you are throwing away!
Here is my article on my low-power, quiet HTPC. I used an AMD Turion, but a Pentium-M works just as well. My goal was to make a PC that would not overheat even when it was enclosed in my home theater with my DVD player, PS2, etc.
The other option is a Mac Mini, Apple TV, or a laptop.
So I am expected to believe your opinion of an article you didn't read, and combine that with a claim where you provided no references? It sounds like you are set in your opinion, and facts and information have become irrelevant. Really, you just increased my confidence in Scientific American.
1) Diesel fuel has more energy than gasoline, so it requires less of it 2) The big problem is C02 emissions. If we can become carbon neutral with BioDiesel, then the other issues can be dealt with.
Check out last month's Scientific American article on diesel fuels. Essentially, diesel is as clean as gasoline, it's just that U.S. manufactured diesel contained lots of junk in it that wasn't in diesel from other sources.
Are you suggesting that Microsoft or Sun would make voting software, release the source, and then someone else would take that source code and sell it to the government as their own? Yeah... and nobody would notice that.
Of course, Microsoft would never write such code anyway. Voting machines are probably profitable for the maintenance contracts, not the hardware or the software.
Yeeeha! Now, if only I knew who EMI was or listened to mainstream music anymore, then I might buy something! Maybe I'll buy a few songs even if I don't like them, just so I get a chance to vote with my dollars.
<pessimist>I wonder how long before someone spins this and says that the increased sales are due to customers demanding higher-quality files, and that the DRM didn't matter, so they can put the DRM back in and keep selling the songs at the same price.</pessimist>
Slashdot Mirror
I never thought of the criminal -vs- civil issue. I'll have to agree with you on that.
It's compatible in that you can code something with a Java 5/Java 6 compiler, but is still runs on the Java 4 runtime. This is because they implemented generics as a language kludge rather than a true feature of the runtime. They traded performance for compatibility. Whereas with Microsoft, you can't compile something to use .NET 2.0 generics then run it on the .NET 1.1 framework.
Dear Indie Movie Lover,
Explosions are expensive.
Sincerely,
Most people
That wasn't flaimbait - that was a pertinent point about the design goals of HTML.
Imagine if it were simpler: Suppose Company A made a great product but killed babies. And Company B made a mediocre product but saved babies. Which product would you buy? Naturally, life isn't that simple. But you can't just ignore the behavior of a company when buying their products. Every dollar you spend is a vote that money should go toward that organization. Knowing that, I don't want money going toward thes Microsofts, Novells, and SCOs of the world. The agreement is harmless to "the community." It's an indemnity agreement! That's about the most benign thing two companies could possibly sign. Okay, so onto the subject of Novell specifically. By signing that deal, Novell is openly acknowledging that Linux infringes on Microsoft patents. And when Microsoft sues someone, they can refer to that indemnity deal as evidence that the patent is valid and that the infringement did occur. Microsoft has even openly stated that this deal is because Novell knows of such infringement. And Novell denying it is obviously a lie since there is no other reason for them to go into the deal. Novell is playing politics with someone else's intellectual property and that stinks. So no, I won't support them in it. And no, that doesn't make me a moron.
I wonder if professional spammers will attend the conference to learn how to get through the next generation of filters. Maybe it would be like playing spot the Fed at the hacker's conferences.
Woohooo! Win by knockout
We, the developers of the world, are in a bad situation right now. The ideal application is a zero-deployment cross-platform GUI application. Writing such an application depends on an already deployed cross-platform framework. The problem is that the dominant platform for doing this is a cobbled together load of crap.
.NETb y|C#|whatever)
Which of the following is the _best_ environment to develop a zero-deployment cross-platform GUI application?
1) Java applet/Java web start
2)
3) HTML+CSS+Javascript+HTTP+SOAP+XML+(Python|PERL|Ru
The last option is the slowest, most complicated, and hardest to develop for, with the fewest features, and is most brittle (changes in OS, software version, etc. may break it). Unfortunately, it is also the only one everybody has on their computer.
The reason for this is that we had several competing standards, and they all competed well enough to hold each other from gaining critical mass. And in the mean time, a mish-mash of technologies never intended for this purpose gained enough momentum that it snuck onto everyone's computer before we realized what it was. We had AJAX around for years before the general developer population realized it existed!
I don't see a way out. We are stuck with the AJAX solution unless we all decide to get together and agree to some other standard. But there is too much infighting for that to become likely. If Sun had done things differently, we would all be writing Java applications today. But it didn't work-out that way. I, for one, welcome our over-complicated AJAX development tools - since I don't really have a choice anymore.
This design looks like it might be compatible with a tip-driven propellor. I don't think a traditional helicopter could work with one.
I don't know aerodynamics very well either. But I think you are correct. When I first watched the video, my question was "why doesn't it rotate from all the torque of that motor on top?" The stator vanes (never heard that term before, but I assume that means the little things on the outside shell around it) are probably the issue. Because on a helicoptor, you need a second propellor or a tail propellor to fix that problem.
Suppose you bought an Apple car that advertised it could go 0-60 in 5 seconds, but it took 15 seconds when you drove it. Then Apple points out that you have to buy 900 octane gas for it to get that kind of acceleration, and Apple's own store doesn't sell that kind of gas! That would suck, and it is what Apple is doing.
This is very unusual for: They tend to present the OS, hardware, and services all under one brand and all ready for action at once. That is why Apple has a serious following. It is completely fair to point out that the Apple TV is billed as one thing but delivers another.
Ironically, it would be difficult to perform such a study if you had censorship. You would never know if you had looked at all aspects of it. It seems to me that science and reason cannot exist in a world where certain ideas are off limits. It would be like trying to mathematically prove the sum of the first 10 whole numbers while simultaenously banning the number 3.
Users don't choose their OS, they choose the platform. If they chose Microsoft, then they'll get Vista eventually. The only way out is to choose *nix or Mac. And most people aren't ready to make that leap.
The Nintendo DS only supports WEP.
Here is my article on my low-power, quiet HTPC. I used an AMD Turion, but a Pentium-M works just as well. My goal was to make a PC that would not overheat even when it was enclosed in my home theater with my DVD player, PS2, etc.
The other option is a Mac Mini, Apple TV, or a laptop.
So I am expected to believe your opinion of an article you didn't read, and combine that with a claim where you provided no references? It sounds like you are set in your opinion, and facts and information have become irrelevant. Really, you just increased my confidence in Scientific American.
Read the March Scientific American article on diesel engines. Also, keep in mind two things:
1) Diesel fuel has more energy than gasoline, so it requires less of it
2) The big problem is C02 emissions. If we can become carbon neutral with BioDiesel, then the other issues can be dealt with.
Check out last month's Scientific American article on diesel fuels. Essentially, diesel is as clean as gasoline, it's just that U.S. manufactured diesel contained lots of junk in it that wasn't in diesel from other sources.
Are you suggesting that Microsoft or Sun would make voting software, release the source, and then someone else would take that source code and sell it to the government as their own? Yeah... and nobody would notice that.
Of course, Microsoft would never write such code anyway. Voting machines are probably profitable for the maintenance contracts, not the hardware or the software.
Yeeeha! Now, if only I knew who EMI was or listened to mainstream music anymore, then I might buy something! Maybe I'll buy a few songs even if I don't like them, just so I get a chance to vote with my dollars.
<pessimist>I wonder how long before someone spins this and says that the increased sales are due to customers demanding higher-quality files, and that the DRM didn't matter, so they can put the DRM back in and keep selling the songs at the same price.</pessimist>