Folks, this has been said before, but bears repeating. Microkernels vs. monolithic kernels is a valid debate, but not *the* debate. Instead of allowing arbitrary binary code, and trying to figure out how to build complicated tricks to verify that it does not break security, we should be working on an operating system based on a virtual machine with a high level bytecode, a JIT, and a bytecode verifier to ensure that only code with predictable semantics is allowed to execute. With such an OS, the whole thing could run in supervisor mode with no traps at all, thus offsetting whatever performance is lost due to the bytecode execution (which I think would be minimal anyway since we have really good JITs these days).
Amen to that! For most other sites, choosing either plain HTML or a real (Java Web Start or even -- horror --.Net or native) app is much easier. Mod parent up!:)
I would disagree....
The problem with the current system is that numbers get passed around without the frame of reference, with the tacit assumption that it is known. So, when I say it's "5pm", it's like saying, "the temperature is 13" or "the wind speed is 49". 49 what?
Using a timezone suffix (3pm PST) provides the necessary and sufficient information, but still requires extra knowledge to do the math -- what is the time difference between PST and where I'm at right now? It doesn't help that daylight time gets turned off and on, so you have to remember which "mode" you're in, but your wristwatch doesn't tell you at a glance.
Using a numerical timezone delta (5pm GMT+5) provides the necessary information in a convenient manner. But, at that point, we might all as well just use GMTs.
The emphasis of the patent, and its actual claims, are different things. Yes, they have a cool (if incremental) improvement I have not seen before. And yes, they would be correct in trying to patent it. But the actual legal claims start with:
1. Method for presenting multiple virtual desktops in a single graphical user interface formed on a display of a computer system, the display having a first periphery and a second periphery, the method comprising: receiving an indication from a user to preview the multiple virtual desktops; and displaying multiple panes occupying at least the first periphery of the display, each pane containing a scaled virtual desktop having dimensions that are proportionally less than the dimensions of a corresponding full-size virtual desktop, each scaled virtual desktop being displayed with one or more scaled application windows if the corresponding full-size virtual desktop has one or more corresponding application windows that are active.
To my mind, this claim is invalid given prior art, and it is on this basis that I decided the patent was not valid. Perhaps I'm mistaken -- if so, pls educate me!
I actually did the patent search originally because CodeTek claims that their VirtualDesktop product is "patent pending". Don't get me wrong -- I love CTVD and consider it necessary for my daily work on Mac OS X. But patent pending? It doesn't matter if it's M$ doing it or poor little CodeTek.... That said, I could not find any application attributed to CodeTek. Hmm....
Slashdot Mirror
Folks, this has been said before, but bears repeating. Microkernels vs. monolithic kernels is a valid debate, but not *the* debate. Instead of allowing arbitrary binary code, and trying to figure out how to build complicated tricks to verify that it does not break security, we should be working on an operating system based on a virtual machine with a high level bytecode, a JIT, and a bytecode verifier to ensure that only code with predictable semantics is allowed to execute. With such an OS, the whole thing could run in supervisor mode with no traps at all, thus offsetting whatever performance is lost due to the bytecode execution (which I think would be minimal anyway since we have really good JITs these days).
Amen to that! For most other sites, choosing either plain HTML or a real (Java Web Start or even -- horror -- .Net or native) app is much easier. Mod parent up! :)
Yep, that's it. :)
I would disagree.... The problem with the current system is that numbers get passed around without the frame of reference, with the tacit assumption that it is known. So, when I say it's "5pm", it's like saying, "the temperature is 13" or "the wind speed is 49". 49 what? Using a timezone suffix (3pm PST) provides the necessary and sufficient information, but still requires extra knowledge to do the math -- what is the time difference between PST and where I'm at right now? It doesn't help that daylight time gets turned off and on, so you have to remember which "mode" you're in, but your wristwatch doesn't tell you at a glance. Using a numerical timezone delta (5pm GMT+5) provides the necessary information in a convenient manner. But, at that point, we might all as well just use GMTs.
I actually did the patent search originally because CodeTek claims that their VirtualDesktop product is "patent pending". Don't get me wrong -- I love CTVD and consider it necessary for my daily work on Mac OS X. But patent pending? It doesn't matter if it's M$ doing it or poor little CodeTek.... That said, I could not find any application attributed to CodeTek. Hmm....