I repeating my self - but there are repeated "prior art" claim from those who did not read the original article.
The patent is about a particular combination of features which includes for example a magnification function. Also the Dock captures running application - so it is a combination of Toolbar and Minimized Windows.
And this combination has not been there in OS/2. Or any other Dock-like tool. The closest I know of is:
A) The Window-Maker or Afterstep Docks - but they don't have a magnification function.
B) RocketDock - RocketDock does have a magnification function but does not approach the Dock in reliability when it comes to handling running applications.
I used the Launchbar on OS/2 quite a lot. It did not have, for example, a magnification function. Also the Dock combines both the features of the Launchbar and the Minimized Windows window.
So, no, OS/2 did not have a Dock. It had two separate tools which provided some but not all of the functionality.
As much as I hate design and software patents myself - your post is uncalled for. The patent is about the combination of features which in that combination does not exist elsewhere.
The object in the middle won't be travelling at (almost) the speed of light - at least not in any direction which is head on to any of the other two objects
Because there aren't three black hole colliding - there are two black holes colliding and then a third one colliding into the result. Remember they are travelling at the almost speed of light so the collision won't take very long.
Only Mac OS X is a certified Unix with BSD roots. The other BSDs aren't certified. But then - as symbolset has pointed out: OpenSolaris isn't certified either.
It was that little gap which made me move from Linux to Max OS X. And the endless amount of fine tuning Linux needed.
Now I can play Videos without hunting down codecs which aren't included in the distribution "for legal reason".
Now I can buy a WebCam without the need to make a 3 day internet research to find out which WebCam might work with Linux.
Only to find out that while the WebCam in principle works with Linux and Skype just got video support in Linux - the particular combination is a no go.
And the last point is the most important one. Quite possible that I get several replies telling me how great Skype Video works on there computer, on there distro, with there WebCam.
But tell you what: It does not matter. It must work with every distro - reliably. And then companies might start to add "Linux compatible" stickers on there WebCam boxes. And then is Linux is finally ready for - not the Desktop - but the SOHO market.
And the SOHO market is the battle field where the OS wars are fought. IBM with OS/2 noticed to late. And Linux does have a good chance here. Only Linux is entrenched in it's own KDE vs GNOME battles while it is more important to get things to just work - which includes Linux more compatible sticker on shrink wrap products.
AFAIK Apple just took kHTML and renamed it to Webkit - So Nokia did not need to put "Apples Webkit" into the Qt framework - it has allways been there. Qt had "Webkit" aka kHTML before Apple had it.
Because Georgia was harassing there citizens. And Georgia has been warned (that of course was not reported in western media).
The two territories in question had not been traditional Georgian territory. They only became part of Georgian district when the soviet union straitened out some borderlines. That much for territorial integrity.
The had also been two referendum for independence - both passed with 90%+. Now G.W. view on Democracy must be very different form mine. Because I always thought democracy is about what people want and a referendum should therefore break both territorial integrity and governmental will.
And in fact in my home country it does: Any territory in Germany can leave the federation with a 66% majority in a referendum.
In C++ the situation is indeed better. But still far from perfect. I still see two problems:
1) The old style "(int*)" cast still work and is quickly typed. The "reinterpret_cast" - what I would consider "sufficient painful to type" - is only optional. And not all compiler support it - so lazy programmers draw the "compatibility joker" to not use it. And not every programmer know about it.
2) With most compilers warnings are off by default - and quite a few programmer forget about activation it. Or don't activate warnings because of all the warnings..... there badly written written code will produce.
So there is not only the language factor but also the human factor. Not learning the newest features of there language. Not accepting the value of warnings.
Because they did what one should not do: convert integers to pointers and vice versa. This only works well when the size of an an integer is the same as the size of pointer. This was true for 32 bit CPUs and programmers got used to it. (it wasn't for 8 bit and most of the 16 bit CPUs).
As the 32 bit area was so long programmers got used to it. And the fact that an int is 32 bit. In the end compiler designers where between the devil and the deep blue see. Either make int same size as a pointer 64 bit - and break existing code relying on 32 bit integer or make the in in 32 bit and break existing code relying int beeing the same size as pointer.
Personally the ease of converting integer to pointer is one of the top 3 design mistakes in C (which carried across to C++). Don't get me wrong: A system level programming language needs such a conversion. It just should not be so easy - it should be painful to use so it is not overused.
If the x86 OS crashes because of an errand device driver it's still an OS bug. It wasn't in the 70th an 80th but it is today. Because x86 from from 386 onwards offer 4 level of hardware protection and it is a design bug if an OS running on x386 is using only two of them.
One should have placed device driver into Ring 1 - then they could not blue screen the system
If the Wii didn't exist would MS have sold several million more 360s? Of course they would.
Maybe - but note that I am not interested in either PS3 or XBOX - but I sometime do look at Wii with interest.
So it not the same market - it's an overlapping market, yes - but not the same. Because there are current and potential Wii customers who would have bought nothing at all if Wii did not exist.
Well reading that chapter it seems that XFS and JSF are the only true options available. With anything else you are asking for trouble. Of course XFS (my favorite) isn't shrinkable. Anybody knows if JSF is shrinkable?
It would be enough if they did not have enough resources left so they won't find a mate anymore.
And I think here is where the human rance goes wrong and which might ultimately be our downfall: No matter how little resources you have you still find a mate.
In the normal course of natural selection your offspring would now starve... But it is somehow not the case with humans
Slashdot Mirror
Does it magnify?
Does it display and handle running applications?
I repeating my self - but there are repeated "prior art" claim from those who did not read the original article.
The patent is about a particular combination of features which includes for example a magnification function. Also the Dock captures running application - so it is a combination of Toolbar and Minimized Windows.
And this combination has not been there in OS/2. Or any other Dock-like tool. The closest I know of is:
A) The Window-Maker or Afterstep Docks - but they don't have a magnification function.
B) RocketDock - RocketDock does have a magnification function but does not approach the Dock in reliability when it comes to handling running applications.
But did it have all the features of the Dock. Like a magnification function. The patent is about a combination of functions which is pretty unique.
Did the navbars have a magnification function and an icon for all active applications and open documents as well?
The Dock is more then just a quick start icon list.
I used the Launchbar on OS/2 quite a lot. It did not have, for example, a magnification function. Also the Dock combines both the features of the Launchbar and the Minimized Windows window.
So, no, OS/2 did not have a Dock. It had two separate tools which provided some but not all of the functionality.
Did the Sidebar have a "magnification function"?
As much as I hate design and software patents myself - your post is uncalled for. The patent is about the combination of features which in that combination does not exist elsewhere.
Well a CD can be spun to 52x - any player reading faster uses multiple laser.
Martin
The object in the middle won't be travelling at (almost) the speed of light - at least not in any direction which is head on to any of the other two objects
I think Loibisch answer was closer to the truth - even closer then my own answer.
Because there aren't three black hole colliding - there are two black holes colliding and then a third one colliding into the result. Remember they are travelling at the almost speed of light so the collision won't take very long.
Only Mac OS X is a certified Unix with BSD roots. The other BSDs aren't certified. But then - as symbolset has pointed out: OpenSolaris isn't certified either.
Martin
Nor is any particular flavor of BSD.
Mac OS X is a certified BSD based Unix.
Martin
Indeed Apple does not use Desktop CPU's at all - Most Apple systems use mobile CPUs while MacPro and XServe use Server (XEON) CPUs.
It was that little gap which made me move from Linux to Max OS X. And the endless amount of fine tuning Linux needed.
Now I can play Videos without hunting down codecs which aren't included in the distribution "for legal reason".
Now I can buy a WebCam without the need to make a 3 day internet research to find out which WebCam might work with Linux.
Only to find out that while the WebCam in principle works with Linux and Skype just got video support in Linux - the particular combination is a no go.
And the last point is the most important one. Quite possible that I get several replies telling me how great Skype Video works on there computer, on there distro, with there WebCam.
But tell you what: It does not matter. It must work with every distro - reliably. And then companies might start to add "Linux compatible" stickers on there WebCam boxes. And then is Linux is finally ready for - not the Desktop - but the SOHO market.
And the SOHO market is the battle field where the OS wars are fought. IBM with OS/2 noticed to late. And Linux does have a good chance here. Only Linux is entrenched in it's own KDE vs GNOME battles while it is more important to get things to just work - which includes Linux more compatible sticker on shrink wrap products.
Martin
AFAIK Apple just took kHTML and renamed it to Webkit - So Nokia did not need to put "Apples Webkit" into the Qt framework - it has allways been there. Qt had "Webkit" aka kHTML before Apple had it.
I don't think so. Java is a rather primitive language and only it's huge standart library makes usefull.
Because Georgia was harassing there citizens. And Georgia has been warned (that of course was not reported in western media).
The two territories in question had not been traditional Georgian territory. They only became part of Georgian district when the soviet union straitened out some borderlines. That much for territorial integrity.
The had also been two referendum for independence - both passed with 90%+. Now G.W. view on Democracy must be very different form mine. Because I always thought democracy is about what people want and a referendum should therefore break both territorial integrity and governmental will.
And in fact in my home country it does: Any territory in Germany can leave the federation with a 66% majority in a referendum.
In C++ the situation is indeed better. But still far from perfect. I still see two problems:
1) The old style "(int*)" cast still work and is quickly typed. The "reinterpret_cast" - what I would consider "sufficient painful to type" - is only optional. And not all compiler support it - so lazy programmers draw the "compatibility joker" to not use it. And not every programmer know about it.
2) With most compilers warnings are off by default - and quite a few programmer forget about activation it. Or don't activate warnings because of all the warnings ..... there badly written written code will produce.
So there is not only the language factor but also the human factor. Not learning the newest features of there language. Not accepting the value of warnings.
Because they did what one should not do: convert integers to pointers and vice versa. This only works well when the size of an an integer is the same as the size of pointer. This was true for 32 bit CPUs and programmers got used to it. (it wasn't for 8 bit and most of the 16 bit CPUs).
As the 32 bit area was so long programmers got used to it. And the fact that an int is 32 bit. In the end compiler designers where between the devil and the deep blue see. Either make int same size as a pointer 64 bit - and break existing code relying on 32 bit integer or make the in in 32 bit and break existing code relying int beeing the same size as pointer.
Personally the ease of converting integer to pointer is one of the top 3 design mistakes in C (which carried across to C++). Don't get me wrong: A system level programming language needs such a conversion. It just should not be so easy - it should be painful to use so it is not overused.
For the benefit of the international readership: could you explain what F. D. I. C. is?
If the x86 OS crashes because of an errand device driver it's still an OS bug. It wasn't in the 70th an 80th but it is today. Because x86 from from 386 onwards offer 4 level of hardware protection and it is a design bug if an OS running on x386 is using only two of them.
One should have placed device driver into Ring 1 - then they could not blue screen the system
I would say that the P800 from Sony Ericcson was out before M$ arived on the scene.
But apart from that I agree with your post.
If the Wii didn't exist would MS have sold several million more 360s? Of course they would.
Maybe - but note that I am not interested in either PS3 or XBOX - but I sometime do look at Wii with interest.
So it not the same market - it's an overlapping market, yes - but not the same. Because there are current and potential Wii customers who would have bought nothing at all if Wii did not exist.
Martin
Well reading that chapter it seems that XFS and JSF are the only true options available. With anything else you are asking for trouble. Of course XFS (my favorite) isn't shrinkable. Anybody knows if JSF is shrinkable?
It would be enough if they did not have enough resources left so they won't find a mate anymore.
And I think here is where the human rance goes wrong and which might ultimately be our downfall: No matter how little resources you have you still find a mate.
In the normal course of natural selection your offspring would now starve... But it is somehow not the case with humans