because glassfish and netbeans don't have the perceived importance of mysql in their respective markets.
there is not a chance in the world they will be around in the long run. oracle isn't going to duplicate software dev teams to build competing products in house.
really, people that spend their time fighting construction of new cell towers need to get some hobbies or otherwise find something better to do with their free time.
do you think garmin will remain the company it is today selling GPS units to the subset of kayakers that require a GPS? i think that's what people are getting at. of course there's a market for offline, rugged GPS units, but companies like garmin and tom-tom are living of the spoils of consumer level auto GPS units.
standalone GPS companies are going to shrink, which means they will have less $ for r&d, which means their features will start to lag behind smart phone GPS software. in other words, a downward spiral.
i wish someone could explain how tivo avoided being acquired. their user interface is one of the best i've seen, ever. the writing has been on the wall for them for 5 years. the fact that they still exist is a testament to how good of a device it is.
whoever is in charge of mergers / acquisitions at tivo really, really, dropped the ball. they should have been an acquisition target for every major cable company, AT&T, and every major dish company. it's essentially over for them. every TV providing entity has their own DVR now, and they are closing the gap with tivo rapidly. i've been thinking about moving to AT&T U-verse to get out from under comcast's boot, and from what i've read their DVR is as good or better than tivo.
i've had 3 tivo boxes since 2000. i feel an almost brotherly love for them as a company. yes i know how stupid that sounds. it makes me sick they couldn't figure out how to be successful.
Of course Windows is harder. It is not even designed to be complete, so it can't hope
to be. It is specifically intended to subject the end user to a big inconvenience with
websites and driver downloads and driver CDs.
on my ubuntu K laptop, there are many things that just don't work because it's linux. for example, the fingerprint reader, and the media / volume controls.
linux is self-contained alright, with drivers covering a significant subset of the features available on my box. but ya, i'd hate to be "inconvenienced" and be able to download the drivers and get those things to work. but that's not even an option with linux.
Linux doesn't need a fast CPU or graphics acceleration to be awesome. That's the point they're making here.
you know you can install linux on just about any x86 desktop right? even if it has windows pre-installed. any x86 desktop is a linux desktop, as is the one i quoted that has superior hardware, is smaller, and costs $200 less.
any way you slice it, it's better to pay less and get better hardware. linux might not need the better hardware to be functional, but it sure can take advantage of it and give a better experience.
the dell studio hybrid is $200 less, has a 2.1GHz core duo processor, and includes MS windows. i am sure there are other examples. really folks if anything this is an anti-linux desktop advertisement.
there is no reason to try to subvert chrome indirectly by spiting google search
I don't follow this - how would it "subvert Chrome indirectly"? I don't think Google is really dependant on Firefox toolbar-searches to stay afloat!
i didn't say google was dependent on mozilla. they do pay them $66 million though, so obviously having them there on the default home page is worth something wouldn't you say?
mozilla should continue to do what's best for the user and compete on those merits.
If Mozilla don't have any money, they can't pay any developers. If they can't pay any developers, they can't keep their browser up to date. While I'm sure users love having Google as their default search-engine, I think they like new features more, I think they like speed increases more, and I think they like increased security more. If having Google search was the dealbreaker they could have stopped developing years ago with nothing to fear from IE.
if they can't get funding it's because there's a lack of interest in the project. if there's a lack of interest, let it die a natural death. that's not a bad thing, it's just the evolution of software. are you crying that netscape / netscape browser isn't around anymore?
yes, it's easy to change the default back to google, but heck, it's also easy to uninstall the MSFT / bing toolbar. maybe mozilla should ship that one out of the box. who cares if it's not what the user's want right?
Ah yes, I'd forgotten we were in the world of black and white,
having google the default home page, or not, is black and white.
google is more important to most people than mozilla. not having google as the default search engine is not only going to lose them the $$$ from google but will also turn lowbie users away from firefox. "hey, i want the browser that uses google search."... that's chrome.
Well as I said, if you're right then this isn't a problem - no need for development money, all people want is Google in the top-right hand corner and they will be happy if the project stagnates. Alternatively it's just about possible that people want a variety of things, and possibly even that different people value different things... differently! Internet Explorer didn't lose out to Firefox because it didn't have Google search - it lost out because Firefox was a better browser. These days Firefox is losing out to Chrome because some of its users value speed and reliability over extensions.
Users want a thousand different things each, and none of them want the same thousand. Implementing the "best features" is a balancing act.
as sad as it makes the average/. user, people do make decisions based on things that might seem silly to you. like whether it's installed by default, what search engine it uses, and whether my neighbor bob uses it. this is pretty well established and it's why IE has a dominant market share.
IE didn't lose BTW, it's beating FF handily. unless you are stating a subjective opinion that it's better. in which case i'd redirect you somewhere other than/. where that can be debated fairly.
i appreciate an expert's take on this. my problem wasn't so much that it was different, but the change seemed arbitrary. they still have menus, but they just moved them about places other than the menu bar. the first thing i wanted to do was paw through the preferences, and it took my some time to find them. the icon i needed to click wasn't even labeled with text. why do they think that i'd logically look for preferences to the right of the of the location bar?
and worse, i just booted up chrome for mac, and it *does* have a menu bar. why did they think they don't have to be consistent on linux, but they do on mac? chrome for mac doens't have the preferences icon.
The user's best interest is not very well served by Mozilla going bankrupt and having to stop work on Firefox.
there is no reason to try to subvert chrome indirectly by spiting google search. mozilla should continue to do what's best for the user and compete on those merits. google is the best search today, and that's what most users will want as the default.
yes, it's easy to change the default back to google, but heck, it's also easy to uninstall the MSFT / bing toolbar. maybe mozilla should ship that one out of the box. who cares if it's not what the user's want right? supporting bing hurts google / chrome, and that's a good thing right?
google is more important to most people than mozilla. not having google as the default search engine is not only going to lose them the $$$ from google but will also turn lowbie users away from firefox. "hey, i want the browser that uses google search."... that's chrome.
i tried to move to chrome actually. seemed like the right thing to do since i've swallowed the google pill many times over. it's UI is just odd. every other app has a menu bar, but chrome thinks they don't need one. well, actually it still has menus, they are just accessible from other places in the app where you would not logically look for them.
for example, the "preferences" menu is next to the location bar. it's the little wrench icon. okay, every other app has a menu>tools or menu>edit>prefs. chrome still puts it all under a menu, but they moved the menu into a non-standard location. every other major OS has menu bars. like them or not people are used to them. it's intuitive to start poking around in the menu bar when you want to find something.
it's in mozilla's, and their user's best interest to provide their users with the best search engine by default. that's google as of today. mozilla should be happy that they are getting paid to do the best thing for their users.
as far as i know google isn't doing anything to subvert mozilla. they are just fairly competing with them. mozilla is open source, and open source shouldn't have any pride. if google bests them at some point, they shouldn't take it as an insult. let the best browser win.
it's probably about the same option that i have on my android phone. google search is tightly integrated into the OS. not that i mind, i'm just saying...
it would be really, very surprisingly if AMD could have won out in the long run against intel. that's what makes intel's actions all the more perplexing.
the problem is that no one has a crystal ball that is going to tell us how much intel's market manipulation contributed to their success. if they manipulated the market, they have to pay for it regardless of how much of an effect it had. i hope for them it had a big effect considering the deep poopoo they are in because of it.
intel: oh really. by the way, the price of that lot of intel CPUs you plan to purchase just doubled.
PC manufacturer:...
the PC manufacturer had to ship intel-based systems because there was some significant portion of consumers that recognize the intel brand name... despite the fact that intel-based CPUs were inferior to AMD at the time. that's called anti-competitive practices... for the obvious reason that AMD wasn't being allowed to compete based on price / technical / marketing merits.
would intel have technical superiority over AMD right now if the playing field was level during the 90's-00's? good question.
The original press release did not say they lifted censorship. It said they would discuss the legality of "legal unfiltered results"
you are 1/2 right. the quote is below,
We have decided we are no longer willing to continue censoring our results on Google.cn, and so over the next few weeks we will be discussing with the Chinese government the basis on which we could operate an unfiltered search engine within the law, if at all.
they haven't done it yet (at the time the blog was written), but they said they have decided that they will lift censorship, period. the decision was made. this is a pretty strong statement. if they backtracked on this, they would face a PR nightmare.
you are probably reading too much into that. if the carrier screwed up and didn't deliver the device, you'd email them and get the phone reshipped.
it's more likely they are covering the case where you refuse shipment.
not to mention, i live off mail order and have never had a package fail delivery. even if they can't find your house or you are not home to receive they email / phone / leave notes. i am not saying it doesn't happen, but the percent of time it does happen across all packages delivered is insignificant.
If you buy the phone on a contract, you pay $80 a month. If you buy the phone without a contract, you still pay $80 a month.
in general you are right, but for t-mo that's not the case. they have discounted month-month plans. they are the only provider that has this sort of pricing. i wish they'd get more kudos for it.
you can buy just about any smart phone you want unlocked and be completely free of any contract or impending ETF.
i'll never buy a phone under contract again. i bought and unlocked N1 and my wife has an out of contract iphone. if my provider does something i don't like, i leave. problem solved.
this is more about education than anything else. don't post anything at all on facebook or any other online service that you don't want to share with everyone you know, and people you will know in the future. anything from your political views to your lifestyle can and will be used against you.
it's commonplace for universities, businesses, etc to look you up on facebook and google and see what you are all about. it's up to you to conduct yourself on facebook in a manner befitting. don't post anything on facebook you wouldn't gladly offer up in a job interview, on your university application, or to a stranger on the street.
i weep for all the kids these days who will have the indiscretions of their teen and pre-teen years come back to haunt them later in life. posted on facebook? it's now public data that will never, ever go away. i consider myself very lucky to be able to forget / hide some of the things i did in my youth. i am sure if i was a teenager today, i'd be right there posting pictures of my ass and making rude comments about my school instructors.
actually, google doesn't control what goes on the app store. i could go there right now and publish whatever i want. there is a "report" link to report malicious / offensive apps.
android does require all apps to be signed... but they can be self signed. seems like a simple solution would be to force the user to look at the cert holder before they install the app. it can provide an extra warning if the cert is self signed. very non-tech users would simply never install self-signed apps. tech users could make their own decision. if the app says it's a banking app, self signed would be a big red flag.
Slashdot Mirror
because glassfish and netbeans don't have the perceived importance of mysql in their respective markets.
there is not a chance in the world they will be around in the long run. oracle isn't going to duplicate software dev teams to build competing products in house.
really, people that spend their time fighting construction of new cell towers need to get some hobbies or otherwise find something better to do with their free time.
do you think garmin will remain the company it is today selling GPS units to the subset of kayakers that require a GPS? i think that's what people are getting at. of course there's a market for offline, rugged GPS units, but companies like garmin and tom-tom are living of the spoils of consumer level auto GPS units.
standalone GPS companies are going to shrink, which means they will have less $ for r&d, which means their features will start to lag behind smart phone GPS software. in other words, a downward spiral.
i wish someone could explain how tivo avoided being acquired. their user interface is one of the best i've seen, ever. the writing has been on the wall for them for 5 years. the fact that they still exist is a testament to how good of a device it is.
whoever is in charge of mergers / acquisitions at tivo really, really, dropped the ball. they should have been an acquisition target for every major cable company, AT&T, and every major dish company. it's essentially over for them. every TV providing entity has their own DVR now, and they are closing the gap with tivo rapidly. i've been thinking about moving to AT&T U-verse to get out from under comcast's boot, and from what i've read their DVR is as good or better than tivo.
i've had 3 tivo boxes since 2000. i feel an almost brotherly love for them as a company. yes i know how stupid that sounds. it makes me sick they couldn't figure out how to be successful.
Of course Windows is harder. It is not even designed to be complete, so it can't hope
to be. It is specifically intended to subject the end user to a big inconvenience with
websites and driver downloads and driver CDs.
on my ubuntu K laptop, there are many things that just don't work because it's linux. for example, the fingerprint reader, and the media / volume controls.
linux is self-contained alright, with drivers covering a significant subset of the features available on my box. but ya, i'd hate to be "inconvenienced" and be able to download the drivers and get those things to work. but that's not even an option with linux.
Linux doesn't need a fast CPU or graphics acceleration to be awesome. That's the point they're making here.
you know you can install linux on just about any x86 desktop right? even if it has windows pre-installed. any x86 desktop is a linux desktop, as is the one i quoted that has superior hardware, is smaller, and costs $200 less.
any way you slice it, it's better to pay less and get better hardware. linux might not need the better hardware to be functional, but it sure can take advantage of it and give a better experience.
the dell studio hybrid is $200 less, has a 2.1GHz core duo processor, and includes MS windows. i am sure there are other examples. really folks if anything this is an anti-linux desktop advertisement.
there is no reason to try to subvert chrome indirectly by spiting google search
I don't follow this - how would it "subvert Chrome indirectly"? I don't think Google is really dependant on Firefox toolbar-searches to stay afloat!
i didn't say google was dependent on mozilla. they do pay them $66 million though, so obviously having them there on the default home page is worth something wouldn't you say?
mozilla should continue to do what's best for the user and compete on those merits.
If Mozilla don't have any money, they can't pay any developers. If they can't pay any developers, they can't keep their browser up to date. While I'm sure users love having Google as their default search-engine, I think they like new features more, I think they like speed increases more, and I think they like increased security more. If having Google search was the dealbreaker they could have stopped developing years ago with nothing to fear from IE.
if they can't get funding it's because there's a lack of interest in the project. if there's a lack of interest, let it die a natural death. that's not a bad thing, it's just the evolution of software. are you crying that netscape / netscape browser isn't around anymore?
yes, it's easy to change the default back to google, but heck, it's also easy to uninstall the MSFT / bing toolbar. maybe mozilla should ship that one out of the box. who cares if it's not what the user's want right?
Ah yes, I'd forgotten we were in the world of black and white,
having google the default home page, or not, is black and white.
google is more important to most people than mozilla. not having google as the default search engine is not only going to lose them the $$$ from google but will also turn lowbie users away from firefox. "hey, i want the browser that uses google search." ... that's chrome.
Well as I said, if you're right then this isn't a problem - no need for development money, all people want is Google in the top-right hand corner and they will be happy if the project stagnates. Alternatively it's just about possible that people want a variety of things, and possibly even that different people value different things... differently! Internet Explorer didn't lose out to Firefox because it didn't have Google search - it lost out because Firefox was a better browser. These days Firefox is losing out to Chrome because some of its users value speed and reliability over extensions.
Users want a thousand different things each, and none of them want the same thousand. Implementing the "best features" is a balancing act.
as sad as it makes the average /. user, people do make decisions based on things that might seem silly to you. like whether it's installed by default, what search engine it uses, and whether my neighbor bob uses it. this is pretty well established and it's why IE has a dominant market share.
/. where that can be debated fairly.
IE didn't lose BTW, it's beating FF handily. unless you are stating a subjective opinion that it's better. in which case i'd redirect you somewhere other than
i appreciate an expert's take on this. my problem wasn't so much that it was different, but the change seemed arbitrary. they still have menus, but they just moved them about places other than the menu bar. the first thing i wanted to do was paw through the preferences, and it took my some time to find them. the icon i needed to click wasn't even labeled with text. why do they think that i'd logically look for preferences to the right of the of the location bar?
and worse, i just booted up chrome for mac, and it *does* have a menu bar. why did they think they don't have to be consistent on linux, but they do on mac? chrome for mac doens't have the preferences icon.
The user's best interest is not very well served by Mozilla going bankrupt and having to stop work on Firefox.
there is no reason to try to subvert chrome indirectly by spiting google search. mozilla should continue to do what's best for the user and compete on those merits. google is the best search today, and that's what most users will want as the default.
yes, it's easy to change the default back to google, but heck, it's also easy to uninstall the MSFT / bing toolbar. maybe mozilla should ship that one out of the box. who cares if it's not what the user's want right? supporting bing hurts google / chrome, and that's a good thing right?
google is more important to most people than mozilla. not having google as the default search engine is not only going to lose them the $$$ from google but will also turn lowbie users away from firefox. "hey, i want the browser that uses google search." ... that's chrome.
i tried to move to chrome actually. seemed like the right thing to do since i've swallowed the google pill many times over. it's UI is just odd. every other app has a menu bar, but chrome thinks they don't need one. well, actually it still has menus, they are just accessible from other places in the app where you would not logically look for them.
for example, the "preferences" menu is next to the location bar. it's the little wrench icon. okay, every other app has a menu>tools or menu>edit>prefs. chrome still puts it all under a menu, but they moved the menu into a non-standard location. every other major OS has menu bars. like them or not people are used to them. it's intuitive to start poking around in the menu bar when you want to find something.
it's in mozilla's, and their user's best interest to provide their users with the best search engine by default. that's google as of today. mozilla should be happy that they are getting paid to do the best thing for their users.
as far as i know google isn't doing anything to subvert mozilla. they are just fairly competing with them. mozilla is open source, and open source shouldn't have any pride. if google bests them at some point, they shouldn't take it as an insult. let the best browser win.
it's probably about the same option that i have on my android phone. google search is tightly integrated into the OS. not that i mind, i'm just saying ...
it would be really, very surprisingly if AMD could have won out in the long run against intel. that's what makes intel's actions all the more perplexing.
the problem is that no one has a crystal ball that is going to tell us how much intel's market manipulation contributed to their success. if they manipulated the market, they have to pay for it regardless of how much of an effect it had. i hope for them it had a big effect considering the deep poopoo they are in because of it.
something like this:
the PC manufacturer had to ship intel-based systems because there was some significant portion of consumers that recognize the intel brand name ... despite the fact that intel-based CPUs were inferior to AMD at the time. that's called anti-competitive practices ... for the obvious reason that AMD wasn't being allowed to compete based on price / technical / marketing merits.
would intel have technical superiority over AMD right now if the playing field was level during the 90's-00's? good question.
http://coverage.t-mobile.com/default.aspx?MapType=Data
a little suspicious that they release this right after all the bad press about nexus one customer support, hmmm?
The original press release did not say they lifted censorship. It said they would discuss the legality of "legal unfiltered results"
you are 1/2 right. the quote is below,
We have decided we are no longer willing to continue censoring our results on Google.cn, and so over the next few weeks we will be discussing with the Chinese government the basis on which we could operate an unfiltered search engine within the law, if at all.
they haven't done it yet (at the time the blog was written), but they said they have decided that they will lift censorship, period. the decision was made. this is a pretty strong statement. if they backtracked on this, they would face a PR nightmare.
In most places in the world, corporations are more overtly powerful than governments.
you are probably reading too much into that. if the carrier screwed up and didn't deliver the device, you'd email them and get the phone reshipped.
it's more likely they are covering the case where you refuse shipment.
not to mention, i live off mail order and have never had a package fail delivery. even if they can't find your house or you are not home to receive they email / phone / leave notes. i am not saying it doesn't happen, but the percent of time it does happen across all packages delivered is insignificant.
If you buy the phone on a contract, you pay $80 a month. If you buy the phone without a contract, you still pay $80 a month.
in general you are right, but for t-mo that's not the case. they have discounted month-month plans. they are the only provider that has this sort of pricing. i wish they'd get more kudos for it.
no options?
you can buy just about any smart phone you want unlocked and be completely free of any contract or impending ETF.
i'll never buy a phone under contract again. i bought and unlocked N1 and my wife has an out of contract iphone. if my provider does something i don't like, i leave. problem solved.
this is more about education than anything else. don't post anything at all on facebook or any other online service that you don't want to share with everyone you know, and people you will know in the future. anything from your political views to your lifestyle can and will be used against you.
it's commonplace for universities, businesses, etc to look you up on facebook and google and see what you are all about. it's up to you to conduct yourself on facebook in a manner befitting. don't post anything on facebook you wouldn't gladly offer up in a job interview, on your university application, or to a stranger on the street.
i weep for all the kids these days who will have the indiscretions of their teen and pre-teen years come back to haunt them later in life. posted on facebook? it's now public data that will never, ever go away. i consider myself very lucky to be able to forget / hide some of the things i did in my youth. i am sure if i was a teenager today, i'd be right there posting pictures of my ass and making rude comments about my school instructors.
actually, google doesn't control what goes on the app store. i could go there right now and publish whatever i want. there is a "report" link to report malicious / offensive apps.
android does require all apps to be signed ... but they can be self signed. seems like a simple solution would be to force the user to look at the cert holder before they install the app. it can provide an extra warning if the cert is self signed. very non-tech users would simply never install self-signed apps. tech users could make their own decision. if the app says it's a banking app, self signed would be a big red flag.