Do bear in mind that England is one of, if not the absolute, world's oldest democracy, with democratic rights dating back 800 years.
It's a pretty shoddy definition of democracy, where only a small percentage of the population gets to vote. I think you better shorten your time span by about 600 years.
The (delusional) dream of working on something like that is the only thing that lured me away from programming and into engineering. If not for sci-fi, there is a non-trivial chance that my path would have sent me down the road of making apps for people's cell phones instead of making the chips that go inside of them.
Making chips that go into cell phones is more important to society than writing the software that makes the chips do something useful? ???
Let's face it. Software only becomes irrelevant when computing machines go away. Google might be "an ad company", but it's funding a lot of interesting endeavors and introducing competition in new areas. There's danger that it could become another Microsoft and monopolize it's market in a way that stifles innovation (like Microsoft did to the PC industry), but right now a good amount of competition still exists.
One writer, with no discernible software background, using another writer, with no discernible software background, as a source. Both make assumptions that open source somehow attracts a lower skill level of software developer than than large corporations (who have been known to source based on cost rather than skill). It's funny that their supporting data comes from a closed environment.
Even though I agree that America needs to end it's imperialism, isn't the article concerning "ignorant and closed minded" events in India and Kuwait? Let's face it, ignorance is a universal concept.
Really? We had a Bush era in 1978? Maybe an homage to American Imperialism would have been a better wording, because we certainly had that ongoing in 1978.
Yes yes yes. But you know what really pissed you off about Microsoft? I'll tell you. If it wasn't for them creating an OS for the average consumer (not computer scientist, programmers, or data entry types) and marketing it in a manor that will sell, the Internet and technology ushered behind its further development and acceptance would quite likely been pushed out another 15+ years later. Perhaps longer. That's what's really making you angry. Admit it!
Sorry. This is revisionist bullshit. As others have pointed out, consumer oriented PCs were around long before Microsoft and the IBM PC existed. Online access was available (albeit costly and slow) to all of these systems. For example, Compuserve got started in 1969. Competition between Apple, Commodore, Atari, etc. created the PC market.
Just thing about all that has became because of Microsoft Success both directly and indirectly. Faster CPUs, the GPU, online game genres, consoles, web based anything applications including social media... The list goes on and on.
Again this is wrong! Faster processors would be in demand, no matter what computing system was dominant. Online games also existed before Microsoft. Consoles are orthogonal to PCs, but they also existed before Microsoft. Web based applications are orthogonal to desktop computing.
The funny thing is that the opposite of your claims is probably what effect Microsoft has had on the computing industry. The Microsoft monopoly's stifling of competition has slowed innovation, and we would probably be 15 years ahead of where we are now. There would have been more hardware competition on PCs, so we would probably have better CPU architectures; this would be due to a PC sized market driving innovation vs. an embedded sized (think in '80s/90's terms) market.
All of the competing PC vendor lineups would have driven standardization better, so we would have standardized device driver libraries on all platforms, standardized document formats, etc. The reason would be that people would demand to take their data with them when they switch platforms. With equally distributed PC market share, this is possible. With a one company dominated PC market share, the one company can close it's formats, set hardware direction, and sit back on it's laurels until competition is somehow reintroduced. Without the USA and European courts reigning in Microsoft's predatory practices, we might be even further behind in our computing development.
A nice steady pattern for Java now. Growth in each of the previous three years. It is the 12th largest category overall and reached that same rank in 2011.
It seems like programmers are still buying Java books, so interest must be there.
At least it's not mandatory. Examine your risk factors and decide for yourself if the exam is worth your time. It's weird that the medical industry has decided that prostate and colon cancer exams are necessary when only 1-2% and 5% respectively are found to have those cancers.
It's kind of crazy what people will put themselves through to eke out another 5-10 years.
OS/2 didn't really become robust until after the split. The split made OS/2 a better OS, but it left OS/2 without Microsoft's monopoly abuses to help it along.
As opposed to parents taking Valium, laudanum, ingesting Vick's Vapor Rub, etc., or maybe just abusing alcohol? Sorry to burst your bubble, but substance abuse goes back way farther than whatever generation you're referencing. If we bring the whole discredited vaccine link into the picture, we can also list a whole slew of environmental abuses that have affected people's lives.
It's an interesting pathology. Former user (often a fanboy) decides to switch operating systems and becomes obsessed with trying to get everyone to agree with them. Posts start out with specious attempts at logic and eventually dissolve into vitriol-spewing trolling.
Slashdot Mirror
Last I checked, the major players in the global financial network have actual power. And most central/federal governments, too.
Only the people have the actual power. Financiers, governments, crackers, drug cartels, religions, etc. exist solely at the will of the people.
... you don't have to care about users getting upset when you blame THEM!
Currently re-reading Alan Cooper's The Inmates Are Running The Asylum, so the blame the users apologist stance seems especially unsteady right now.
Do bear in mind that England is one of, if not the absolute, world's oldest democracy, with democratic rights dating back 800 years.
It's a pretty shoddy definition of democracy, where only a small percentage of the population gets to vote. I think you better shorten your time span by about 600 years.
The (delusional) dream of working on something like that is the only thing that lured me away from programming and into engineering. If not for sci-fi, there is a non-trivial chance that my path would have sent me down the road of making apps for people's cell phones instead of making the chips that go inside of them.
Making chips that go into cell phones is more important to society than writing the software that makes the chips do something useful? ???
Let's face it. Software only becomes irrelevant when computing machines go away. Google might be "an ad company", but it's funding a lot of interesting endeavors and introducing competition in new areas. There's danger that it could become another Microsoft and monopolize it's market in a way that stifles innovation (like Microsoft did to the PC industry), but right now a good amount of competition still exists.
One writer, with no discernible software background, using another writer, with no discernible software background, as a source. Both make assumptions that open source somehow attracts a lower skill level of software developer than than large corporations (who have been known to source based on cost rather than skill). It's funny that their supporting data comes from a closed environment.
They're working on a new freedom, so government of the corporations, by the corporations, for the corporations, shall not perish from the earth.
They're making Windows TVs now?!? ;-)
It sounds as if your company has a poorly run IT department.
Poorly run IT departments is why Windows exists in business environments.
Well ... Windows attracts flies. ;-)
How can you get more effective than precognition?
Even though I agree that America needs to end it's imperialism, isn't the article concerning "ignorant and closed minded" events in India and Kuwait? Let's face it, ignorance is a universal concept.
No. Microsoft probably did. ;-)
There was a time when MS won on technical merits,
When?
Galactica was [SNIP] an homage to the Bush era.
Really? We had a Bush era in 1978? Maybe an homage to American Imperialism would have been a better wording, because we certainly had that ongoing in 1978.
Yes yes yes. But you know what really pissed you off about Microsoft? I'll tell you. If it wasn't for them creating an OS for the average consumer (not computer scientist, programmers, or data entry types) and marketing it in a manor that will sell, the Internet and technology ushered behind its further development and acceptance would quite likely been pushed out another 15+ years later. Perhaps longer. That's what's really making you angry. Admit it!
Sorry. This is revisionist bullshit. As others have pointed out, consumer oriented PCs were around long before Microsoft and the IBM PC existed. Online access was available (albeit costly and slow) to all of these systems. For example, Compuserve got started in 1969. Competition between Apple, Commodore, Atari, etc. created the PC market.
Just thing about all that has became because of Microsoft Success both directly and indirectly. Faster CPUs, the GPU, online game genres, consoles, web based anything applications including social media... The list goes on and on.
Again this is wrong! Faster processors would be in demand, no matter what computing system was dominant. Online games also existed before Microsoft. Consoles are orthogonal to PCs, but they also existed before Microsoft. Web based applications are orthogonal to desktop computing.
The funny thing is that the opposite of your claims is probably what effect Microsoft has had on the computing industry. The Microsoft monopoly's stifling of competition has slowed innovation, and we would probably be 15 years ahead of where we are now. There would have been more hardware competition on PCs, so we would probably have better CPU architectures; this would be due to a PC sized market driving innovation vs. an embedded sized (think in '80s/90's terms) market.
All of the competing PC vendor lineups would have driven standardization better, so we would have standardized device driver libraries on all platforms, standardized document formats, etc. The reason would be that people would demand to take their data with them when they switch platforms. With equally distributed PC market share, this is possible. With a one company dominated PC market share, the one company can close it's formats, set hardware direction, and sit back on it's laurels until competition is somehow reintroduced. Without the USA and European courts reigning in Microsoft's predatory practices, we might be even further behind in our computing development.
How about this post? http://radar.oreilly.com/2012/03/computer-book-market-2011-part1.html?google_editors_picks=true
From the article:
A nice steady pattern for Java now. Growth in each of the previous three years. It is the 12th largest category overall and reached that same rank in 2011.
It seems like programmers are still buying Java books, so interest must be there.
At least it's not mandatory. Examine your risk factors and decide for yourself if the exam is worth your time. It's weird that the medical industry has decided that prostate and colon cancer exams are necessary when only 1-2% and 5% respectively are found to have those cancers.
It's kind of crazy what people will put themselves through to eke out another 5-10 years.
They are pretty similar, since the only purpose of the digital exams may be your doctor's
Yeah. It is pretty funny to stick a computer up someone's ass. ;-)
Windows NT != OS/2
OS/2 became something very good after the IBM-Microsoft split.
OS/2 didn't really become robust until after the split. The split made OS/2 a better OS, but it left OS/2 without Microsoft's monopoly abuses to help it along.
Which problem should be addressed first the access or the cost?
As opposed to parents taking Valium, laudanum, ingesting Vick's Vapor Rub, etc., or maybe just abusing alcohol? Sorry to burst your bubble, but substance abuse goes back way farther than whatever generation you're referencing. If we bring the whole discredited vaccine link into the picture, we can also list a whole slew of environmental abuses that have affected people's lives.
http://www.alternet.org/environment/154709/the_strange_conservative_brain%3A_3_reasons_republicans_refuse_to_accept_reality_about_global_warming/
It's an interesting pathology. Former user (often a fanboy) decides to switch operating systems and becomes obsessed with trying to get everyone to agree with them. Posts start out with specious attempts at logic and eventually dissolve into vitriol-spewing trolling.
Why do we still use this shit?