No, it is not their decision. They are being anticompetitive. They are illegally abusing their monopoly. It's exactly the same as MS making DOS incompatiable with Lotus so people had to buy MS office instead, and just as illegal, abusive, and plain wrong.
No, there is a big difference. If you buy protected wma, there are any number of players which will play it. Not every player out there, but you do get a lot of choice. And if you want to make your own player to play them, you just need to play microsoft a few dollars. If you buy protected AAC, you can only play them in an iPod, and they won't let you make any other player for them, even if you offer them money.
So you think things like selling batteries are bad business models? Any form of "accessory" is dependent on the, if not co-operation, at least absence of hostility from, the maker of the main item. That doesn't make making accessories an unviable business model.
I don't think it is such a good idea. People just rushed to put Java on everything, because it was very PHB-friendly. And still is, unfortunately. It's an OK language but it's very overused because it's, basically, a buzzword.
We don't care, because we've all moved past java. Spend long enough programming in Python or Ruby and Java starts to look like combining the performance of those languages with the ease of programming of C.
We should perhaps start promoting xine more, as it's really very good. One program that plays any kind of stream you find on the internet. But try simply telling people that the switch from linux to windows is like the switch from IE to firefox. They listen.
And as far as I'm concerned, KDE is a killer app. Yes it runs on cygwin, but not well last I heard. It looks really nice and the integration is awesome. An integrated office suite, set of media players, email etc. clients, IM programs etc. that all look the same and work together is really an amazing achievement. I couldn't manage without it, I really couldn't.
But will that mean more support than you're currently doing with their windows problems? My guess would be no. Get them a distro with a big repository, show them how to search it and how to install programs they like, and ask if they can manage without anything that isn't there. If they really need something that isn't there, tell them you'll install it personally, if possible do it remotely (set up ssh for them). Then you spend close to 0 time supporting them.
If you haven't rebooted it in a year, it's probably a good idea to test the init scripts before doing so. You never know what you might have broke in the meantime.
There goes my argument that Python promotes readable code....
Try comparing it to the 6 line perl one others have posted though. I think it does show Python is more readable, and not good for being really small. But I think it's better to sacrifice compactness for readability.
The point is that banning the *technology* is impossible and silly. Like how Meth being simple to make means it's stupid to try and ban "Meth-making equippment". Which is what INDUCE act is trying to do.
I do. I use a laptop from about, say, 8 years ago, 650mhz celeron with 64mb ram, which does everything I want. Wort processing, surf/., read email, instant messaging, play mp3s and videos, and python coding in idle although it's starting to show the strain there a little. A modern PDA is equivalent in terms of processor, hard disk etc. and a helluva lot more portable. And as soon as I have the money, I'll be getting one.
No, other companies are bitching because Apple deliberately stops them selling restricted songs for the iPod, and major label music is only available to them if they agree to restrict it. Look at real. They tried to license the format so that they could also sell music for the iPod. Then when apple refused they hacked the format. Then apple deliberately made them incompatiable. That is abusing a monopoly. If it were anyone other than Apple doing this, you wouldn't think twice before saying so.
Yes, but then imagine that Dieselco had some secret formula for Diesel and wouldn't tell anyone else, so no-one else could build cars that ran Diesel. And whenever anyone worked out the formula, with lots of effort and lab work, they would change the formula and change all the Dieselco cars, so that the cars from the people who had worked out how to make Diesel cars no longer worked with the new Diesel. Now do you see the problem?
Apple has an effective monopoly on hard drive music players. It's not that they're the only ones available, it's that they're the only ones which sell. That's still a monopoly. They have unfairly leveraged this to make the iTunes music store more successful, by ensuring only iTMS can sell DRM music for the iPod.
Apple does have a monopoly. The iPod is *the* portable player, and has ~80% of the market. They are the only company that can sell DRMed music for the iPod, and they deliberately make it impossible for other companies to do so. That is abuse of a monopoly, plain and simple.
They're making it so you can't buy music from competing music stores. Yes, you can if they will offer it to you in mp3 format, but the major labels don't let that happen. And US law is stopping you going to allofmp3.com. When apple allowed the iPod to play protected content but only from apple stores, that was borderline anticompetitive. When apple deliberately broke the protection scheme so that Real couldn't sell protected tracks to iPod users, that was definitely anticompetitive.
To my mind, having such a large chunk of the portable player market and deliberately making your player incompatiable with another music store so that users of your player have to buy from your music store sounds like abuse of a monopoly position, and illegal abuse at that. In fact it sounds exactly like MS having a large chunk of the OS market and deliberately making their OS incompatiable with another office suite to force users of their OS to buy their office suite, which we know was illegal abuse of a monopoly.
It shows they're deliberately trying to knock out the competition. Which makes me nervous about buying from them. If they really thought their music store was better than Real's, they wouldn't have needed to break Harmony.
If they used un-DRMed music, they would not be able to get deals with any major record labels. And Apple didn't just "not consult" with Real, they deliberately and maliciously broke what Real had done as soon as they could. Though it goes against my very nature to be supporting Real, especially against Apple, they are in the right here.
Buffer overflows are one thing. But the fact that it's possible to have viruses as word documents when word is behaving according to specification is something completely different.
For the same reason as Neo, but in reverse. I don't like the idea that I'm in control of my life, since I'll mess it up. I find the idea of something else controlling my life very comforting. But I also recognise this as probably wishful thinking.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it is not their decision. They are being anticompetitive. They are illegally abusing their monopoly. It's exactly the same as MS making DOS incompatiable with Lotus so people had to buy MS office instead, and just as illegal, abusive, and plain wrong.
No, there is a big difference. If you buy protected wma, there are any number of players which will play it. Not every player out there, but you do get a lot of choice. And if you want to make your own player to play them, you just need to play microsoft a few dollars. If you buy protected AAC, you can only play them in an iPod, and they won't let you make any other player for them, even if you offer them money.
So you think things like selling batteries are bad business models? Any form of "accessory" is dependent on the, if not co-operation, at least absence of hostility from, the maker of the main item. That doesn't make making accessories an unviable business model.
I don't think it is such a good idea. People just rushed to put Java on everything, because it was very PHB-friendly. And still is, unfortunately. It's an OK language but it's very overused because it's, basically, a buzzword.
We don't care, because we've all moved past java. Spend long enough programming in Python or Ruby and Java starts to look like combining the performance of those languages with the ease of programming of C.
And as far as I'm concerned, KDE is a killer app. Yes it runs on cygwin, but not well last I heard. It looks really nice and the integration is awesome. An integrated office suite, set of media players, email etc. clients, IM programs etc. that all look the same and work together is really an amazing achievement. I couldn't manage without it, I really couldn't.
But will that mean more support than you're currently doing with their windows problems? My guess would be no. Get them a distro with a big repository, show them how to search it and how to install programs they like, and ask if they can manage without anything that isn't there. If they really need something that isn't there, tell them you'll install it personally, if possible do it remotely (set up ssh for them). Then you spend close to 0 time supporting them.
If you haven't rebooted it in a year, it's probably a good idea to test the init scripts before doing so. You never know what you might have broke in the meantime.
Try comparing it to the 6 line perl one others have posted though. I think it does show Python is more readable, and not good for being really small. But I think it's better to sacrifice compactness for readability.
The point is that banning the *technology* is impossible and silly. Like how Meth being simple to make means it's stupid to try and ban "Meth-making equippment". Which is what INDUCE act is trying to do.
I do. I use a laptop from about, say, 8 years ago, 650mhz celeron with 64mb ram, which does everything I want. Wort processing, surf /., read email, instant messaging, play mp3s and videos, and python coding in idle although it's starting to show the strain there a little. A modern PDA is equivalent in terms of processor, hard disk etc. and a helluva lot more portable. And as soon as I have the money, I'll be getting one.
Says the guy posting on slashdot complaining about the moderation
No, other companies are bitching because Apple deliberately stops them selling restricted songs for the iPod, and major label music is only available to them if they agree to restrict it. Look at real. They tried to license the format so that they could also sell music for the iPod. Then when apple refused they hacked the format. Then apple deliberately made them incompatiable. That is abusing a monopoly. If it were anyone other than Apple doing this, you wouldn't think twice before saying so.
But they don't license the DRM format. So no one else can sell RIAA music for the iPod. That's the problem.
Yes, but then imagine that Dieselco had some secret formula for Diesel and wouldn't tell anyone else, so no-one else could build cars that ran Diesel. And whenever anyone worked out the formula, with lots of effort and lab work, they would change the formula and change all the Dieselco cars, so that the cars from the people who had worked out how to make Diesel cars no longer worked with the new Diesel. Now do you see the problem?
Apple has an effective monopoly on hard drive music players. It's not that they're the only ones available, it's that they're the only ones which sell. That's still a monopoly. They have unfairly leveraged this to make the iTunes music store more successful, by ensuring only iTMS can sell DRM music for the iPod.
Apple does have a monopoly. The iPod is *the* portable player, and has ~80% of the market. They are the only company that can sell DRMed music for the iPod, and they deliberately make it impossible for other companies to do so. That is abuse of a monopoly, plain and simple.
They're making it so you can't buy music from competing music stores. Yes, you can if they will offer it to you in mp3 format, but the major labels don't let that happen. And US law is stopping you going to allofmp3.com. When apple allowed the iPod to play protected content but only from apple stores, that was borderline anticompetitive. When apple deliberately broke the protection scheme so that Real couldn't sell protected tracks to iPod users, that was definitely anticompetitive.
To my mind, having such a large chunk of the portable player market and deliberately making your player incompatiable with another music store so that users of your player have to buy from your music store sounds like abuse of a monopoly position, and illegal abuse at that. In fact it sounds exactly like MS having a large chunk of the OS market and deliberately making their OS incompatiable with another office suite to force users of their OS to buy their office suite, which we know was illegal abuse of a monopoly.
Apple's store may be the best around at the moment, but I sure don't want to be locked into it.
It shows they're deliberately trying to knock out the competition. Which makes me nervous about buying from them. If they really thought their music store was better than Real's, they wouldn't have needed to break Harmony.
If they used un-DRMed music, they would not be able to get deals with any major record labels. And Apple didn't just "not consult" with Real, they deliberately and maliciously broke what Real had done as soon as they could. Though it goes against my very nature to be supporting Real, especially against Apple, they are in the right here.
who read "Laser Printing" and thought "Shit".
Buffer overflows are one thing. But the fact that it's possible to have viruses as word documents when word is behaving according to specification is something completely different.
For the same reason as Neo, but in reverse. I don't like the idea that I'm in control of my life, since I'll mess it up. I find the idea of something else controlling my life very comforting. But I also recognise this as probably wishful thinking.