... and in a manner that is completely transparent to the user of the computer.
In my book that means: no need for a restart. Completely different from what i.E. FireFox / Thunderbird and the like do - needing to ask the user to stop with his / her work in order to perform the update.
Sorry you lost me as neither Mercedes nor Volkswagen not Kia own roads. So I have difficulties seeing how your parable connects back to Apple.
But if a Kia os more suitable for you then a Mercedes then good for you as you can save some money. But that does not mean that Mercedes pricing policy is wrong.
And the same for Apples pricing policy. I think I got great value for money. Others disagree. Fair enough.
And as for garden walls - if they stop the neighbours dog from littering on my lawn or they keep unwanted guest off then that not a bad thing at all.
You can't blame GTK for Gnome failures, nor can you blame either for failures in apps that rely on either.
But we are talking development models here. And I do blame the Gtk development model for failing to create a consistent development environment. And this in turn leads to less consistent applications produced.
I'm sure there are plenty of KDE apps that will not compile or run without X or other dependencies expected on a Linux system. Will Konsole work with Windows' cmd.com?
Theres one very simple way around them - get off your lazy backside and go and learn Xlib and extension programming.
And be even further away from an fully working Gtk+ / GNOME which does not need an X-Server. While KDE 4 works nicely on Windows and Mac OS X without the need of X. And for me as the user it make a huge difference is is X required or not.
I noticed that the discussion is very Linux centric. However both KDE and GNOME can be used on Windows and Mac OS X. And there the KDE development model has the edge as Qt4 / KDE 4 does not need an X Server.
Ahh yes, theoretically Gtk+ does not need an X server either. But more the 50% of the GNOME apps on MacPorts will fail if Gtk2 is compiled with "+quartz". And the error messages suggest that the applications are looking for an X Server.
Compare that with 100% of KDE 4 apps compiling fine when Qt is compiled with "+cocoa".
That reminds me of OS/2 2.x. The Dos box with it's Windows 3.x was nothing else then what you described. Worked like a charm. Apart from Microsoft trying to beak the set-up with each new Windows 3.x release.
And then there was a planned OS/2 3.0 (not the 2.3 marketed as Warp 3) which was top run OS/2, Dos/Windows 3.11, Windows NT and AIX on top of XEN like hyper-visor. Of course Microsoft killed that by jumping the boat.
If MS wanted that they could have had it long ago.
A Mercedes is more expensive Volkswagen. And a Volkswagen is more expensive then a Kia. That's the way it is. And if you think the Mercedes is overpriced then buy the Kia.
So maybe C++ has become so complex that it can't be extended properly any more.
That's rich, coming from an ADA guy...
Where shall I start to answer that sentence? A single answer wont help here:
Answer 1: Actually I am multi language guy - I programmed 10 years in C++, 5 years C and a lot of other stuff.
Answer 2: The 2003 ISO standard for C++ is 757 pages and the 2007 ISO standard for Ada is 786 pages - that would be 3.8% larger. Only the Ada standard does not only contain multi threading but real time multi threading. There is a trend that programming languages might start light weight but seldom end that way. The first K&R C might have been half the size of Ada 83. But with 537 pages C 99 was just as fat as Ada 95 (582 pages). Only: Ada 95 is object orientated and multi threaded and C isn't. If you put the size of the standard into relation to the features you get then Ada is the lightest of the three.
Answer 3 Last not least: Ada - like predecessor Pascal - is named after a historic person. Yep, not everything with 3 letters is an acronym.
Great - there is still only one compiler to support "export" - almost 10 years after the standard was defined - and you speak about next standard. So when will the compiler we see the first compiler to support you new library?
Martin
PS: I know a language where all generics are "export" and all compiler support it - since 1983. So it is possible to implement.
But there is a difference in the "ease of use" between a language feature and a library feature. That is unless you use a language like smalltalk where everything is library.
Think of how error prone printf is. If parameters and the little % stuff does not match all goes havoc.
And more so in multithreading. Here the bugs are often sporadic and extremely difficult to find. And a programming language which support it natively is a great help. See:
I have done multithreading in C / C++ and a programming language which supports it natively (Ada). And there was a huge difference in the amount of bugs (aka deadlocks) I produced.
It your line of argument which hinders multithreading. Not that you argument is wrong. You are right. But that makes it even more dangerous.
The point is: There is nothing wrong with making your live easy. And if a programming language which makes multithreading easy and less error prone would have caught on we would be a lot further now.
A bit weird, why would you prevent copying of a gratis application.
Because you don't want it to turn up everywhere on the internet. Example: I released a open beta test of my Symbian OS application [1] and soon after it turned up everywhere on the Warez sites. That would not have been the problem. But the copies turned up without any reference to the beta test program or the application homepage or anything.
The vain Warez supplier would not give any credit to the author at all. Authors don't exist for them. Psychological understandable: If they given credit to the author they would need to admit to them self that they are thieving bastards. This is new generation of software pirates which have nothing in common with the hackers of my youth.
So yes: I would consider to set the "no-copy" flag on even on gratis application.
And you can drag and drop it into the trash can if you like. No joking: drag and drop an application icon to the trash can is the normal way to de-install software on Mac OS.
You can drag iexplore.exe to the Recycling Bin as well, if you want to.
You should read up on mac os x bundles.
The Safari Application Icon I am talking about and the user sees on the destkop is realy a directory called Safari.app containing about 800 files.
A great conzept:
Don't need the application - thow it into the trashcan. Main harddrive full - grap some apps and move the over to your 2nd hardrive. Don't have admin right - Install the file application in your home directory.
Installing works by drag an drop as well: Drag the app off the installation media and drop where you want to have it.
Microsoft is accused of trying "monopolized" browser market. You don't have to be successful to be a criminal. If you try to rob a bank and fail you are still a bank robber and will be changed as such.
And you can drag and drop it into the trash can if you like. No joking: drag and drop an application icon to the trash can is the normal way to de-install software on Mac OS.
Martin
PS: I always have laugh when MS-Windows tells me that dragging an application into the trash can won't de-install. It is such a natural way of interacting with the computer that Microsoft has to warn user that they are not that user friendly.
Oh yeah? Then how come "the one that got away" always gets bigger?
Not they don't - so slower they grow so longer they can breed. This is opposite to evolution without men where growing fast meant outgrowing the enemy.
Right on. I am permanently on the hunt to delete those quick-starters. Some of those programs I only use once a month and yet they waste my precious boot time.
I am so fed up of it and one more reason why I use Mac at home nowadays.
Martin
BTW: did you know that on OS X applications are installed and de-installed by drag and drop. So simple, so elegant - in fact so simple and elegant that Microsoft displays are warning when you drag and drop an applications icon into the trash can. On OS X there is no warning - dragging and dropping the application into the trash can will de-install;-) .
Slashdot Mirror
... and in a manner that is completely transparent to the user of the computer.
In my book that means: no need for a restart. Completely different from what i.E. FireFox / Thunderbird and the like do - needing to ask the user to stop with his / her work in order to perform the update.
Not trivial.
The problem is that it is easy to count money and difficult to measure quality.
"We going to save a xxx$." - that goes down like honey.
"We are loosing a xx% quality." - so what.
Right - only english spoken WoW domains.
The only ones that are still around and thriving are Sun, IBM, and HP.
You forgot Apple - OS X is a certified Unix after all.
Sorry you lost me as neither Mercedes nor Volkswagen not Kia own roads. So I have difficulties seeing how your parable connects back to Apple.
But if a Kia os more suitable for you then a Mercedes then good for you as you can save some money. But that does not mean that Mercedes pricing policy is wrong.
And the same for Apples pricing policy. I think I got great value for money. Others disagree. Fair enough.
And as for garden walls - if they stop the neighbours dog from littering on my lawn or they keep unwanted guest off then that not a bad thing at all.
You can't blame GTK for Gnome failures, nor can you blame either for failures in apps that rely on either.
But we are talking development models here. And I do blame the Gtk development model for failing to create a consistent development environment. And this in turn leads to less consistent applications produced.
I'm sure there are plenty of KDE apps that will not compile or run without X or other dependencies expected on a Linux system. Will Konsole work with Windows' cmd.com?
Don't know. Konsole works on Max OS X without X.
Martin
Theres one very simple way around them - get off your lazy backside and go and learn Xlib and extension programming.
And be even further away from an fully working Gtk+ / GNOME which does not need an X-Server. While KDE 4 works nicely on Windows and Mac OS X without the need of X. And for me as the user it make a huge difference is is X required or not.
I noticed that the discussion is very Linux centric. However both KDE and GNOME can be used on Windows and Mac OS X. And there the KDE development model has the edge as Qt4 / KDE 4 does not need an X Server.
Ahh yes, theoretically Gtk+ does not need an X server either. But more the 50% of the GNOME apps on MacPorts will fail if Gtk2 is compiled with "+quartz". And the error messages suggest that the applications are looking for an X Server.
Compare that with 100% of KDE 4 apps compiling fine when Qt is compiled with "+cocoa".
And it is similar on Windows.
That reminds me of OS/2 2.x. The Dos box with it's Windows 3.x was nothing else then what you described. Worked like a charm. Apart from Microsoft trying to beak the set-up with each new Windows 3.x release.
And then there was a planned OS/2 3.0 (not the 2.3 marketed as Warp 3) which was top run OS/2, Dos /Windows 3.11, Windows NT and AIX on top of XEN like hyper-visor. Of course Microsoft killed that by jumping the boat.
If MS wanted that they could have had it long ago.
A Mercedes is more expensive Volkswagen. And a Volkswagen is more expensive then a Kia. That's the way it is. And if you think the Mercedes is overpriced then buy the Kia.
So maybe C++ has become so complex that it can't be extended properly any more.
That's rich, coming from an ADA guy...
Where shall I start to answer that sentence? A single answer wont help here:
Answer 1: Actually I am multi language guy - I programmed 10 years in C++, 5 years C and a lot of other stuff.
Answer 2: The 2003 ISO standard for C++ is 757 pages and the 2007 ISO standard for Ada is 786 pages - that would be 3.8% larger. Only the Ada standard does not only contain multi threading but real time multi threading. There is a trend that programming languages might start light weight but seldom end that way. The first K&R C might have been half the size of Ada 83. But with 537 pages C 99 was just as fat as Ada 95 (582 pages). Only: Ada 95 is object orientated and multi threaded and C isn't. If you put the size of the standard into relation to the features you get then Ada is the lightest of the three.
Answer 3 Last not least: Ada - like predecessor Pascal - is named after a historic person. Yep, not everything with 3 letters is an acronym.
because it is so difficult to implement.
... in C++. As I said Ada has the equivalent of exported generics since 1983. All compilers as the standard demand separate compilation.
MS C++ is also missing "Exception Specifications" and "two-phase name lookup" and a couple of other things.
So maybe C++ has become so complex that it can't be extended properly any more.
Martin
Will that be implemented by the same vendors which implemented "export" in last 10 years?
I believe it when MSC++ and G++ have a fully working implementation.
Martin
Great - there is still only one compiler to support "export" - almost 10 years after the standard was defined - and you speak about next standard. So when will the compiler we see the first compiler to support you new library?
Martin
PS: I know a language where all generics are "export" and all compiler support it - since 1983. So it is possible to implement.
But there is a difference in the "ease of use" between a language feature and a library feature. That is unless you use a language like smalltalk where everything is library.
Think of how error prone printf is. If parameters and the little % stuff does not match all goes havoc.
And more so in multithreading. Here the bugs are often sporadic and extremely difficult to find. And a programming language which support it natively is a great help. See:
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Ada_Programming/Tasking
So you know what I understand in "natively".
Java does not support multithreading - java.lang.Theads a library function does. Have a look here:
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Ada_Programming/Tasking
See, not a library but language keywords. Note that I a fluent and Java and Ada and have designed and implemented larger projects in both.
I have done multithreading in C / C++ and a programming language which supports it natively (Ada). And there was a huge difference in the amount of bugs (aka deadlocks) I produced.
It your line of argument which hinders multithreading. Not that you argument is wrong. You are right. But that makes it even more dangerous.
The point is: There is nothing wrong with making your live easy. And if a programming language which makes multithreading easy and less error prone would have caught on we would be a lot further now.
A bit weird, why would you prevent copying of a gratis application.
Because you don't want it to turn up everywhere on the internet. Example: I released a open beta test of my Symbian OS application [1] and soon after it turned up everywhere on the Warez sites. That would not have been the problem. But the copies turned up without any reference to the beta test program or the application homepage or anything.
The vain Warez supplier would not give any credit to the author at all. Authors don't exist for them. Psychological understandable: If they given credit to the author they would need to admit to them self that they are thieving bastards. This is new generation of software pirates which have nothing in common with the hackers of my youth.
So yes: I would consider to set the "no-copy" flag on even on gratis application.
Martin
[1] http://fx-602p.krischik.com/
And you can drag and drop it into the trash can if you like. No joking: drag and drop an application icon to the trash can is the normal way to de-install software on Mac OS.
You can drag iexplore.exe to the Recycling Bin as well, if you want to.
You should read up on mac os x bundles.
The Safari Application Icon I am talking about and the user sees on the destkop is realy a directory called Safari.app containing about 800 files.
A great conzept:
Don't need the application - thow it into the trashcan.
Main harddrive full - grap some apps and move the over to your 2nd hardrive.
Don't have admin right - Install the file application in your home directory.
Installing works by drag an drop as well: Drag the app off the installation media and drop where you want to have it.
Martin
THERE IS NO "monopolized" browser market
Microsoft is accused of trying "monopolized" browser market. You don't have to be successful to be a criminal. If you try to rob a bank and fail you are still a bank robber and will be changed as such.
Safari comes with OSX.
And you can drag and drop it into the trash can if you like. No joking: drag and drop an application icon to the trash can is the normal way to de-install software on Mac OS.
Martin
PS: I always have laugh when MS-Windows tells me that dragging an application into the trash can won't de-install. It is such a natural way of interacting with the computer that Microsoft has to warn user that they are not that user friendly.
Oh yeah? Then how come "the one that got away" always gets bigger?
Not they don't - so slower they grow so longer they can breed. This is opposite to evolution without men where growing fast meant outgrowing the enemy.
Oh, you can get them here in Europe as well. The important sentence here is
as of 2004, are installed in more than half of Japanese households.
I think that is pretty impressive.
Right on. I am permanently on the hunt to delete those quick-starters. Some of those programs I only use once a month and yet they waste my precious boot time.
I am so fed up of it and one more reason why I use Mac at home nowadays.
Martin
BTW: did you know that on OS X applications are installed and de-installed by drag and drop. So simple, so elegant - in fact so simple and elegant that Microsoft displays are warning when you drag and drop an applications icon into the trash can. On OS X there is no warning - dragging and dropping the application into the trash can will de-install ;-) .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_UNIX_Specification#Mac_OS_X_and_Mac_OS_X_Server