How can you award a patent for something so ambiguous?
Dude I think a 'multimedia PC' (computer with CDROM or one that can play video) from the 1990's is enough to qualify as prior art here.
Furthermore what about the old computers that plugged into the TV? They were a do-everything device for the telly equipped with: * A media drive that handled music (cassette tape), * They downloaded new media (modem), * AND did video in various crazy analogue ways (tv tuner).
Yet ANOTHER ARM CPU that is attached to a x86 computer running Windows.
Seriously - DITCH the x86 already. ARM devices are doing more and more as far as 'good enough' computing is concerned. The 'everything else' that Windows does on x86 is getting less and less.
Linux isn't an operating system. It's a kernel.
Open-source is a term describing a licensing model which make the source code available.
How on earth can they say XYZ product is safer than any program anyone in the world can create? That is essentially what Microsoft have said here.
A 'linux' system can have all its modules unloaded completely, be changed into something completely proprietary, closed, incompatible.. and run on a 1 in a million piece of hardware that noone has heard of just to make a light bulb turn on and off. I think that would be 'more secure'.
I don't get it. What the hell does this thread have to do with me clipping my toe nails on a speedboat while an old lady sits behind me listening to Megadeth?
You're actually right on this one I think. Every time Microsoft comes up with some idea for mixing the web with the desktop, we get screwed. I cite examples: Active desktop ActiveX IE4 taking over local file browser activity Microsoft 'channels' (a toolbar for content-providers that sits on desktop)
What really needs to happen is for there to be a new cloud-based, online-only application framework thats got hooks into an underlying environment that handles hardware.
Oh wait we already have that - ITS CALLED AN INTERPRETED APPLICATION RUNNING ON AN INTERPRETER!!
Bash
python
java
All this sexyness already exists. We dont need to re-invent the wheel. We just need to simplify it for end-users.
Browser-based applications, while certainly not as powerful as most desktop apps (I've seen some web apps that are, but of course those tend to be the exception to the rule), are totally platform-independent*. When you write for the desktop, you're writing for a specific platform, and quite possibly a specific set of versions for that single platform. Web apps require no installation and will run on Windows, Mac, and Linux no problem. When someone creates an agreed-upon framework that's cross-platform, let me know; for now, that framework appears to be the haphazard combination of HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. Yes, there's always the Java VM option, but the web-based approach is still preferable for many things for a number of reasons. Maybe OpenCL or some derivative of it will take over eventually, but that day isn't today.
*Ignoring IE6 and earlier anyways. IE7 is usually close enough, and IE8 has behaved pretty predictably for me.
An application not being in a web browser should NOT be a reason to be OS-specific:
Linux programs mostly are cross platform (non-binary apps that use python, bash, java etc.) The only thing causing compatibility problems are Microsoft & Apple etc.
Open source stuff these days is largely built on tool-kits that run OS indipendantly.
Even browser apps are hard to make cross-platform thanks to MS!! It only seems that web apps are cross platform because Firefox has gotten big.
Actually, they murdered them for competition, as Corporations tend to do.
Google up the difference competitive and anti-competitive. Of course MS are a corporation - but there are some things you can do to make money, and some things you cant.
One of those things you cant do is engineer ways to prevent competitors from making a better product. That is a bad thing because then the top dog won't have any reason to innovate. Hence we have IE6
(I'm pretty sure there's no one on any side of these markets that would turn away market share).
To assume corporations are faceless and any company would do what any other company would do is just silly. If that were the case, then corporations wouldn't get singled out would they? Besides, companies have unique characteristics as much as any other complex entity.
All corporations try to make money - but they make money in very complex & interesting ways.
Slashdot Mirror
Dumbarse of the week.
Look at the massive arms on that chick in the background. They look like two giant cooked turkeys. I bet she could slap me round a bit. MmMmmMMm
Shot, brother.
A pain. Because you changed some hardware and now the licenses dont work.
How can you award a patent for something so ambiguous?
Dude I think a 'multimedia PC' (computer with CDROM or one that can play video) from the 1990's is enough to qualify as prior art here.
Furthermore what about the old computers that plugged into the TV? They were a do-everything device for the telly equipped with:
* A media drive that handled music (cassette tape),
* They downloaded new media (modem),
* AND did video in various crazy analogue ways (tv tuner).
Yet ANOTHER ARM CPU that is attached to a x86 computer running Windows. Seriously - DITCH the x86 already. ARM devices are doing more and more as far as 'good enough' computing is concerned. The 'everything else' that Windows does on x86 is getting less and less.
This is what was meant by the 'shit connections'. The more you upload, the more you can download. Specifics about your ADSL connection are irrelevant.
Linux isn't an operating system. It's a kernel. Open-source is a term describing a licensing model which make the source code available.
How on earth can they say XYZ product is safer than any program anyone in the world can create? That is essentially what Microsoft have said here.
A 'linux' system can have all its modules unloaded completely, be changed into something completely proprietary, closed, incompatible.. and run on a 1 in a million piece of hardware that noone has heard of just to make a light bulb turn on and off. I think that would be 'more secure'.
"Trying to child-proof the world makes us neglect the more important task of world-proofing the child." Best. Signature. EVER
anyone hear a dildo?
all you get are ads for penis enlargement and free porn
For the love of Gods folks, cite your fracking references. So say we all!
Hook me up on that too. I can't for the life of me find anything about 'girls' or 'penis enlargement' on google.
wouldnt mind a cheap rolex watch too.
And that pron that all your friends find when using your computer.
And your old socks from 3 weeks ago.
Oh NOES! Quick MPAA save us from teh bad peeple.
I don't get it. What the hell does this thread have to do with me clipping my toe nails on a speedboat while an old lady sits behind me listening to Megadeth?
This is the best off-topic thread I've seen all week.
Um, those bright colors are used to attract mates. I didn't see reproductive equipment installed in those robots.
Well the rest of us weren't actually looking in that way :P
Apparently you've never seen the fish that sing when you push their buttons :)
WHATS NEW PUSSYCAT?? WoooaaaWooooaaaaWoooooohhh!!
Its ok. You just give her a walmart voucher for free twinkies.
Yeah its a top level overview with 0 zoom capability. And you're right, there was another article about a massive map thing of the kernel.
You're actually right on this one I think. Every time Microsoft comes up with some idea for mixing the web with the desktop, we get screwed. I cite examples:
Active desktop
ActiveX
IE4 taking over local file browser activity
Microsoft 'channels' (a toolbar for content-providers that sits on desktop)
What really needs to happen is for there to be a new cloud-based, online-only application framework thats got hooks into an underlying environment that handles hardware.
Oh wait we already have that - ITS CALLED AN INTERPRETED APPLICATION RUNNING ON AN INTERPRETER!!
Bash
python
java
All this sexyness already exists. We dont need to re-invent the wheel. We just need to simplify it for end-users.
Browser-based applications, while certainly not as powerful as most desktop apps (I've seen some web apps that are, but of course those tend to be the exception to the rule), are totally platform-independent*. When you write for the desktop, you're writing for a specific platform, and quite possibly a specific set of versions for that single platform. Web apps require no installation and will run on Windows, Mac, and Linux no problem. When someone creates an agreed-upon framework that's cross-platform, let me know; for now, that framework appears to be the haphazard combination of HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. Yes, there's always the Java VM option, but the web-based approach is still preferable for many things for a number of reasons. Maybe OpenCL or some derivative of it will take over eventually, but that day isn't today.
*Ignoring IE6 and earlier anyways. IE7 is usually close enough, and IE8 has behaved pretty predictably for me.
An application not being in a web browser should NOT be a reason to be OS-specific:
Linux programs mostly are cross platform (non-binary apps that use python, bash, java etc.) The only thing causing compatibility problems are Microsoft & Apple etc.
Open source stuff these days is largely built on tool-kits that run OS indipendantly.
Even browser apps are hard to make cross-platform thanks to MS!!
It only seems that web apps are cross platform because Firefox has gotten big.
Exactly!! Mod up for enlightened.
Actually, they murdered them for competition, as Corporations tend to do.
Google up the difference competitive and anti-competitive. Of course MS are a corporation - but there are some things you can do to make money, and some things you cant.
One of those things you cant do is engineer ways to prevent competitors from making a better product. That is a bad thing because then the top dog won't have any reason to innovate. Hence we have IE6
(I'm pretty sure there's no one on any side of these markets that would turn away market share).
To assume corporations are faceless and any company would do what any other company would do is just silly. If that were the case, then corporations wouldn't get singled out would they? Besides, companies have unique characteristics as much as any other complex entity.
All corporations try to make money - but they make money in very complex & interesting ways.
Your mother is not a video games console. And, stay on topic please.
:)
This article doesn't seem to raise an eyebrow with me. DDOSing has been around for yonks - the application layer/user network doesn't really matter.
Anyone who has been on IRC knows that DDOSing is as old as the hills - and the previous poster's mom