And now for the second bit of the argument; the idea that a generic, one-size-fits-all, mostly distributed, designed by committee or industry consensus, common denominator platform that by definition depends upon layers of abstraction from the underlying medium; will ever be able to provide the exact same facilities and experience of code written specifically for, and optimized to run on the local bare-metal.
I saw Bugs vs. Rats, it was pretty cool. I'm still waiting for the sequel, Rock, Paper, Scissors vs. The World, with Nicholas Cage as Spock. That one's going to r0xx0rz!
You can most definitely write anything at all in Assembly Language, as long as the language and assembler support your target architecture. In fact, operating systems were once written purely in Assembly Language, since that was the best suited language available to achieve the performance and control required in systems programming.
As an example, UNIX was originally written in PDP Assembly Language, and then ported to C. C was designed as a slight step above Assembly specifically for systems programming in general, and UNIX in particular.
In other words, there are no "naysayers" claiming that C is the only suitable language for systems programming. At least none that actually know what they are talking about.
Still, it's their work, so surely they can charge whatever they want for it--or not distribute it at all?
so now I'm looking at doing it in China where guess what? I won't have to pay them shit and can just sell it on a ton of places like chinamart. yet again the west loses because of greedy MBAs, why am I not surprised?
Greedy MBAs? Says the guy who's contemplating selling other people's work for profit.
Look, there's no rationalizing it: you and others want to make money by selling other people's stuff, and just because you don't get access to it (because it is the author's very prerogative to be a dick or a miser) you want to claim some higher moral ground and go ahead and distribute the work anyway. That's not innovation, that's leeching. You are a parasite.
Sell if you wish, create if you want, innovate if you can; but do not try to claim that somehow making available some old and dusty video game that the author refuses or is unable to continue selling, as progress.
If you're so passionate about vintage video games, why don't you, you know, make your own? Oh no, that'll be too hard. And why should you when there's all these demand for older games that nobody is making money from right now? Smell like an opportunity!
I say this as a vintage video game programmer myself. I make my own games, and produce and distribute them independently. I could package my games with some classics to give myself more exposure by marketing my name alongside others'; it's so easy, for as you say, most have been long forgotten by their original authors. But you know what? I firmly believe that is not right. My games shall stand on their own merit, or not at all.
You too? I myself am potentially one of the worlds' best brain surgeons, although I also potentially dabble in world's best rocket-scientistry and mathematiciancy.
Perhaps we should get together and potentially discuss our potential for world domination.
According to the article, their STARZ licensing contract allowed them to offer Disney and Sony movies for streaming, because the STARZ network is their exclusive distributor.
They are losing more than STARZ content. Much more.
Wow, just... wow. Do you really believe that? It's amazing how people dare talk about things they have no knowledge about, just because it seems to fit within their narrow view of reality.
I wonder what your friends think of it when you blab about some topic with certain, but misrepresented authority.
C) Apple has a history of not only not disclosing information into future ventures, but of actually denying them publicly until they are ready to release them.
But this is what the OS API, frameworks, and libraries are for.
Why should an application farm out work to external, autonomous processes? Who's going to control priority, threading, and all sorts of complexity of organizing and managing the execution of all these different parts? Or is it expected to work as a UNIX pipeline, in series?
By having all those services available to all applications as sub-systems or extensions of the operating, applications can take advantage of them without having to manage external processes, or without external processes running autonomously. They then all execute within the application's context, as extensions to it.
So, yes, it was something quite useful some time ago. Now it is just anachronistic, and obsolete.
Fine, so the browser defaults to using HTTP. Now, if only it could tell to which HOST you intended to connect within that domain.
Oh, could it be the one serving web pages? and how should we call these World Wide Web page hosts? If only there was some sort of moniker to distinguish them from, say, a file server, or an advertising server...
No, it is not the same. On the one hand, you have the provider of the platform offering a default application to interface with certain built-in services which they feel (along with many others) are important differentiating features of the whole product. Moreover, presumably, this software is engineered to be fully integrated with the system.
On the other hand, you have carriers and phone manufacturers auctioning off a phone's "real estate" to the highest bidder of any number of third-party developers, and pre-installing their software--not because it is intrinsically useful, best of breed, or particularly best suited or integrated--but for the mere reason of honouring a cross-marketing deal.
Not being able to uninstall software that came integrated with your OS is reasonably tolerated. Not being able to uninstall third-party, off-the-shelf software that is by definition not integrated with the system, is asinine.
>> no training in the world will help me if I forgot to attach a file to the changeset. and no course ever will allow me to avoid breaking the build if the system is badly configured, like having a change spanning on multiple modules on different scm.
I'll go further and say that no toy missile will ever prevent you from doing something stupid.
You just like being hit in the balls with foam in a public manner, do you?
Slashdot Mirror
Great post!
And now for the second bit of the argument; the idea that a generic, one-size-fits-all, mostly distributed, designed by committee or industry consensus, common denominator platform that by definition depends upon layers of abstraction from the underlying medium; will ever be able to provide the exact same facilities and experience of code written specifically for, and optimized to run on the local bare-metal.
Right-o.
-dZ.
I saw Bugs vs. Rats, it was pretty cool. I'm still waiting for the sequel, Rock, Paper, Scissors vs. The World, with Nicholas Cage as Spock. That one's going to r0xx0rz!
-dZ.
>> Some of those documents must be pretty bug,
Some would say that pretty bugs are the currency of the iPad.
-dZ.
Yes, we've learned to enough to come up with JavaScript and VisualBasic.
-dZ.
I thought real programmers use Assembly... or was it Fortran?
-dZ.
No, he used the point, various times. You, on the other hand, missed the shift key again.
dZ.
Tender loving... Domain?
You can most definitely write anything at all in Assembly Language, as long as the language and assembler support your target architecture. In fact, operating systems were once written purely in Assembly Language, since that was the best suited language available to achieve the performance and control required in systems programming.
As an example, UNIX was originally written in PDP Assembly Language, and then ported to C. C was designed as a slight step above Assembly specifically for systems programming in general, and UNIX in particular.
In other words, there are no "naysayers" claiming that C is the only suitable language for systems programming. At least none that actually know what they are talking about.
-dZ.
ICS is from Francois Piette. Chad made Indy, the competing component suite. I wouldn't imagine any of them begin happy about the confusion.
-dZ.
Still, it's their work, so surely they can charge whatever they want for it--or not distribute it at all?
Greedy MBAs? Says the guy who's contemplating selling other people's work for profit.
Look, there's no rationalizing it: you and others want to make money by selling other people's stuff, and just because you don't get access to it (because it is the author's very prerogative to be a dick or a miser) you want to claim some higher moral ground and go ahead and distribute the work anyway. That's not innovation, that's leeching. You are a parasite.
Sell if you wish, create if you want, innovate if you can; but do not try to claim that somehow making available some old and dusty video game that the author refuses or is unable to continue selling, as progress.
If you're so passionate about vintage video games, why don't you, you know, make your own? Oh no, that'll be too hard. And why should you when there's all these demand for older games that nobody is making money from right now? Smell like an opportunity!
I say this as a vintage video game programmer myself. I make my own games, and produce and distribute them independently. I could package my games with some classics to give myself more exposure by marketing my name alongside others'; it's so easy, for as you say, most have been long forgotten by their original authors. But you know what? I firmly believe that is not right. My games shall stand on their own merit, or not at all.
-dZ.
So, basically, your definition of "building on the ideas of the past" is to make money off of someone else's work?
Douchebaggery indeed.
dZ.
You too? I myself am potentially one of the worlds' best brain surgeons, although I also potentially dabble in world's best rocket-scientistry and mathematiciancy.
Perhaps we should get together and potentially discuss our potential for world domination.
-dZ.
According to the article, their STARZ licensing contract allowed them to offer Disney and Sony movies for streaming, because the STARZ network is their exclusive distributor.
They are losing more than STARZ content. Much more.
-dZ.
Stop it!
Verbing weirds language.
dZ.
Wow, just... wow. Do you really believe that? It's amazing how people dare talk about things they have no knowledge about, just because it seems to fit within their narrow view of reality.
I wonder what your friends think of it when you blab about some topic with certain, but misrepresented authority.
Take a look at this:
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_ipad/ipad_accessories/keyboards
The keyboard accessory for the iPad was announced at the same time the original iPad was introduced, and very prominently, too.
But of course, it is easier to think it is all part of the Grand Master Evil Plan of Apple. Feels nice and warm, doesn't it?
-dZ
Or,
C) Apple has a history of not only not disclosing information into future ventures, but of actually denying them publicly until they are ready to release them.
-dZ.
I'll trade you my Flooz and Beanz for your CueCat...
But this is what the OS API, frameworks, and libraries are for.
Why should an application farm out work to external, autonomous processes? Who's going to control priority, threading, and all sorts of complexity of organizing and managing the execution of all these different parts? Or is it expected to work as a UNIX pipeline, in series?
By having all those services available to all applications as sub-systems or extensions of the operating, applications can take advantage of them without having to manage external processes, or without external processes running autonomously. They then all execute within the application's context, as extensions to it.
So, yes, it was something quite useful some time ago. Now it is just anachronistic, and obsolete.
-dZ.
Fine, so the browser defaults to using HTTP. Now, if only it could tell to which HOST you intended to connect within that domain.
Oh, could it be the one serving web pages? and how should we call these World Wide Web page hosts? If only there was some sort of moniker to distinguish them from, say, a file server, or an advertising server...
-dZ.
You kind of proved his point. News for nerds, indeed. Stuff that matters to nerds.
-dZ.
No, it is not the same. On the one hand, you have the provider of the platform offering a default application to interface with certain built-in services which they feel (along with many others) are important differentiating features of the whole product. Moreover, presumably, this software is engineered to be fully integrated with the system.
On the other hand, you have carriers and phone manufacturers auctioning off a phone's "real estate" to the highest bidder of any number of third-party developers, and pre-installing their software--not because it is intrinsically useful, best of breed, or particularly best suited or integrated--but for the mere reason of honouring a cross-marketing deal.
Not being able to uninstall software that came integrated with your OS is reasonably tolerated. Not being able to uninstall third-party, off-the-shelf software that is by definition not integrated with the system, is asinine.
-dZ.
Looks like someone needs a foam missile launcher...
I'll go further and say that no toy missile will ever prevent you from doing something stupid.
You just like being hit in the balls with foam in a public manner, do you?
-dZ.
Or Motorooglerola.
-dZ.
Steve Jobs left John Lasseter and his team at Pixar much to their own devices.
-dZ.