the blu-ray standard changes, as does it's features.
Which is why they're so well positioned to be streaming devices. Blu-Ray players are already designed to be upgradeable and extensible to new streaming standards.
Furthermore I'm pretty sure Heritage sites are attached to UNESCO funding. So it also strikes me as a not-too-subtle attempt to lock in money to guarantee its survival.
Ummm.. so you're giving customers time tables and then you're missing them?
Sounds like the recipe for a bad review. Crazy idea. *Factor in* the fact that you will have other customers and it might rain during the construction process before giving estimates/bids.
A Blu-Ray player decodes 1080p streams of h264 or AVC. That's incidentally exactly all that a streaming movie player needs to do as well.
Unless the TV magically upgrades to 4k or a streaming service uses a codec that is far more intensive than H264 or AVC it should have all the hardware it'll ever need.
I'm not at all sure of this. A TV has a lifespan of many years and is quite expensive. These boxes are cheap. I picked up a WD box for $100. Sure, my next TV will probably do everything this box does. But where will I be 2-3 years after my next TV. Will the TV have the processing power to keep up? Will the manufacturer keep putting out new versions of the software for 10 years after I bought the TV? Doubtful.
No but you'll be able to buy a "Blu-Ray" player which is updated. How often you use the blu-ray functionality vs the Netflix functionality has yet to be seen but the Blu-Ray player makers will offer something Roku can't: Blu Rays.
I don't know if you have noticed but every passenger on an airliner pays about $20 in airport taxes per trip. I have to believe that it covers a good chunk of the air traffic control system.
It is just a new stepping stone, with most of the energy to get there coming from electric motors hauling you up to the stationary orbit.
Wasn't there a space elevator test from a helicopter where they found the wire itself generated a pretty large voltage potential from earth's magnetic field?
I didn't say Search Engine Traffic = Piracy. I said 99.9% of search engine traffic is piracy. Congratulations you're the.1% nice to meet you.
(I also use EZTV to check if a TV show is airing tonight, so I'm certainly guilty of not pirating something every time I visit myself.) But only because I'm so... uhhh... familiar with EZTV's interface?:P
And yet I'm sure you still want to watch our TV programs, movies, listen to our music and install our software.
Look, I'm all against egregious uses of government against innocent people. But Torrent Freaks is 99.9% designed to facilitate piracy. And unless you have a plan for a business model where you can still get $80m projects developed and executed for you then I'm not going to bemoan on principle someone wanting to profit from their efforts. IP while being free to copy isn't free to produce. There are real tangible costs to producing art--often very high costs when you're talking about media. A kickstarter page and $50k isn't going to create an episode of Game of Thrones.
Whether these websites actually hosted material might make a legal distinction but let's be real fucking honest for a moment, when I got KickassTorrents or PirateBay, I'm doing so with the intent to break the law. Now I think the law should punish you like a parking ticket or speeding--both of which I also do--but I don't take some high and mighty bullshit immature whining fest because The Man impeded my freedom to speed. If I was speeding... I was speeding. I'm going to try and avoid cops and do everything my power to avoid getting a ticket but I'm not going to say the US Government Pol Pot for enforcing a principle which I do actually agree with. I agree in principle that the city needs to charge for parking. And I've crossed my fingers before and ran into a store because I didn't want to bother walking back to the meter to feed it.
We'll happily stop censoring the world when the world pays for all of our products that they use.
But all too often IT puts these level of draconian stops on systems which don't need to touch anything secure.
In my opinion this should all be handled at the application level and the hardware level not the OS/Device level.
Reduce your security attack vectors. If you plug in a completely compromised system they should have no-where to go. If they download an encrypted file off of the file server then that file should be encrypted and rely on separate hardware. For instance I don't want to encumber my personal phone with IT security lock down nonsense so I only access our services through the web offerings. With a two authentication system in place you could limit what a person pulls down when from the servers. Never let any device anywhere pull down every single record to the device. Keep the application running in a sandbox/VM.
99% of your users don't even touch sensitive data. So the fact that they are milling around with the same security privilege is wasteful.
You might get a slightly higher rate of security breaches but they would be for very small chunks of data. Maybe you would lose 2-3 customers' information. Instead of 30 million.
Treat every computer that connects to the castle fortress that is your server as an enemy. And only serve up the thing they ask for--not access to entire file shares.
But that was just proof of a developer 'future proofing' their work so that even on computers that hadn't been created yet people would continue to get advances without re-releasing a new game/engine.
Crysis has grown and evolved along with the hardware over the last 4 years. Now we can play Crysis as it *could have looked* 4 years ago. So we're still getting an evolving product without the developer having to do anything.
Despite how much the Slashdot and Gamer community decries DLC... it's kind of to 'blame' in my opinion.
I still play TF2 more than anything else. It was released in October 2007 and it still feels fresh.
We're not only stagnating on the engines our games run on... we're not even necessarily playing new games.
Hardware manufacturers aren't the only ones who are realizing that it's more profitable to hold onto what you've already made and just make more of it.
Sticking to the current Source Engine has probably saved Valve a boatload of money. Epic Games has continued to improve Unreal Engine 3. But it's mostly be evolutionary add-ons and optimizations for multiple platforms. They're able to ship more copies of UE3 without having to re-invent the wheel.
We're also going to hit a bottleneck. With rasterization every little effect and feature is a unique hack. In order to have those hacks work together is a nightmare. And then artists have to spend a significant portion of their time optimizing their assets for a rasterized pipeline.
I think we're hitting the limits of what people can manage to keep straight with rasterization. The future is raytracing in my opinion--it's just too slow at this very second. But it's fundamentally far simpler and easy to create content for. You want a reflective material. Great. Create a ray. Shoot it in the reflection vector. Once it hits something it'll follow that shader's properties. And so on and so forth.
Lighting, shading, rendering, effects.... it's all easy and straightforward to write. It's just kind of slow. Maybe Caustic's OpenRL and Optix will fix that in the future. Time will tell. But the status quo is an unfortunate dead weight hanging around the advancement of image fidelity.
I goof off, check my facebook status, chat with friends, shop and goof off. But in return I don't put the same 9-5 mentality in. The transition from work to leisure is far less obvious.
If your friends are at work and you get work done with them--but also goof off then you're less likely to go home at 5pm sharp.
The 9-5, Mon-Fri mentality is breaking down with Gen-Z. And with good reason--it's not how many hours you put in--it's what you deliver. If someone is incredibly efficient but has no aspirations of higher pay or promotion. Great! they get to goof off more and spend their time how they please, I could care less.
But more to the point, users are far more tech savvy than they used to be. And IT departments are by and large paranoid assholes. Admittedly most people are conversely stupid chimpanzees but that's changing and IT needs to learn to adapt. The perfect case is my brother in law who works for a large fortune 500 who shall not be named who just within the last year or two upgraded *TO* Windows XP from 2000. And just very recently upgraded IE6 to IE7 on all corporate laptops.
His login times are literally 14-15 minutes on a laptop. He's not necessarily a Geek but he's certainly competent enough to run the computers in his household. If you just provided a laptop with secure access to Outlook and a File Share he would be fine.
We run into situations constantly where corporate machines at client organizations don't even have Quicktime. I'm sorry, yes it takes more work, yes you'll be removing bonzai buddy but the expenses of lost productivity as people lose *actual revenue generating work* because their computers seem to have popped out of 1996 is the far greater cost to the company than a policy of perhaps extra laptops with a low payed intern ghosting them back to workable again.
Takes too long and is unworkable. If I had to figure out that gravity would pull me downwards I would have broken all of my legs multiple times.
We do this little thing called "learning" that teaches us to recognize situations or objects which are similar to others and we can transpose characteristics we know from past experience onto new experiences. It's the fundamental basis of our intellect and intelligence. You can look at a Ford Taurus and know that it's a car. That cars generally travel on roads. And that you shouldn't walk in front of them. If you judged each car differently then you would have to re-learn the entire traffic system to remain safe. It's untenable.
If someone looks like a hippie then they 95% of the time generally fit into hippie culture. I've never run into a conservative right wingnut who has dreadlocks and natural fiber clothes.
There are also cultures. I have a bunch of French friends. They're definitely united by a common culture. I can't easily recognize a Frenchman from an Italian on the street but I certainly have a baseline expectation for people with a French upbringing. And I from experience know how to adapt to interact best with their mannerisms. Countries and cultures have personalities. Not everyone matches one personality obviously but the range tends to be skewed in one direction.
Most people the world over are generally pretty similar at some level. Starting from species and working our way through culture, sub-cultures and ultimately individual personality you're getting progressively less insightful about the variation.
Two random hippies are probably more similar than a shy Hippie and a shy Glenn Beck aficionado.
The trouble is when you start putting unjustified qualifiers on it.
"Hippies can't came up with any practical ideas. They're useless bums. They contribute nothing to society. They're just leeches."
"Right Wingnuts hate poor people. They are incapable of intelligent though. They abhor human rights."
Often we mis-attribute motivations to people. "African Americans have higher unemployment because they're Lazy." "Or there is another underlying social cause that's preventing them from finding employment or disproportionately eliminating the jobs that they previously had."
If you simply ignore the fact that African Americans *are* factually experiencing higher unemployment then you will never figure out why it's occurring and what can be done to fix it. It's not judgmental, since you're still operating from the basic assumption that we're all pretty much the same as far as personality goes genetically--but culturally and socially we by and large still have a notably different upbringing.
So then you have to start refining to figure out specifically which group of African Americans are disproportionately unemployed. If you go across economic lines is it affecting everyone with dark skin (implying it's purely a racial discrimination problem) or is it only affecting the poorer African Americans? Etc...
If you put too great of an emphasis on individual analysis starting from a completely blank slate you'll spend an eternity just getting to the interesting distinguishing factors.
For instance I would describe my dad as a "University philosophy teacher who lives to paint." There are only four descriptive words in there, but I think if you decompressed the sub-cultures and connotations you would probably be able to extract a relatively accurate caricature. It certainly lacks nuance but you would be about 95% right.
I can nearly very accurately describe myself in even less characters: ENTP. If you start from that assumption you would not be far off in your assumptions about me.
Actually Baptists are more complicated. Unlike most denominations Baptists are founded on the principle that there *is no central authority*. Yes you can choose to associate yourself with baptists or not, and yes he probably was just statistically speaking but unlike another denomination Baptism was founded on the principle that every preacher had their own authority to interpret scripture and preach the word as inspired to them.
And many Baptists hold the notion of permanent salvation. So if you at some point in your life accept Jesus then you're saved regardless of your future activity. It's more complicated than that.. but that's the general idea--at least in some baptist circles.
So yes they might kick you out of seminary... but you could just go to another "Baptist" seminary that you set up and become a "Baptist" minister that teachers Evolution. It's quite democratic and 'free market' compared to other denominations.
-Atheist w/ ex-Baptist Brother in Law w/ Baptist Preacher father.
Not the generic--non Apple implication usage of "Killer App". In reference to OS/2 no-less.
Apple has never defended the word "App" as a trademark. It's been used extensively in print and by corporations the world over. "Killer App" "Mobile App" "Web App". It's been in use for well over 2 decades.
So if we can conclude that the word "App" is generic and indefensible then combining it with a descriptor for the place where one buys apps as a store-- it's no less generic.
App (Generic) + Store (Generic) == Generic.
If however Apple had decided to name its iPhone apps something new and unique as a term for an app like... "Dot" then they could trademark it. "Dot, a trademarked term to name Applications for the iOS." They could then call it a Dot Store and limit its usage to computer software and be safe.
Apple chose the word "App" because that's what everybody already called Apps. We called them apps when they were on windows ce, palmOS, Windows, Linux, OS9, the web... the world over when you said "App" to someone who used a computer knew what you were talking about. And they weren't thinking of something that only ran on a Mac or was trademarked by Apple.
I disagree. I think things have gotten dramatically easier.
I can learn Android or iOS in about 3 minutes. It would take me a good hour or two to program a VCR.
Navigating my Home Theater Receiver's menus is an effort in rage inducing frustration. Why? Because it is limited 640x480 and it is designed by someone who loathes the user--or so I assume. If it was HD and like Windows Phone 7 or iOS it would be easy and obvious.
A standard which I can currently only plugin to an Apple computer but not PCs? DOA.
Portable HDDs are supposed to be portable. Part of portability is working on multiple platforms. Until Intel gets their PC release in line it's only going to be used by those who know they'll only ever want their data on a Mac.
Well not only that but you can never be fine grained enough for the user to understand.
If your app saves data to the cloud then it needs the ability to "Copy files to remote servers".
That's either a trojan or the app operating correctly. No way to tell without per-file transaction confirmations. "I'm about to move a temp.dat to the cloud. Ok?" And even then. "Wait, what's in temp.dat?" And so on and so forth.
The only difference between a malicious network aware application and a good one is what data is being transferred.
It's like a webcam app. "This app will access your camera and transmit video across the internet."
Perfect!
But there is no way to secure that video so that they couldn't also store a copy on their servers and post it to voyeuristic sites. The only security in such a situation would be a physical tag over your camera lens.
Phones are designed to transmit and share your data. They're essentially designed to be exploited.
Considering domestic spying has been mostly directed at leftist dissidents (Martin Luther King Jr, War Protesters, 'Communist sympathizers' etc...) I find it odd that you would be considered a progressive cause. Doubly questionable since most of the people *fighting* the Patriot Act in the first place were leftist progressives.
It's not a question of whether or not the command line terminal can do the same things, it still could, it's a question of how you build those terminal scripts.
SQL Queries for instance are pretty obtuse but there are some great tools to help you build them with interactive results.
Why I can't for instance just type ' Move "//path/file.ext" to "//newpath/" instead of mv etc... boggles my mind.
Sure mv is shorter. But why not offer an 'easy' path for those who don't have the shortened commands memorized? Is it really so hard to ignore the "to". It helps people interact with the computer more naturally and it takes an extra 1 second to type. It takes me more than a second to remember mv.
Slashdot Mirror
the blu-ray standard changes, as does it's features.
Which is why they're so well positioned to be streaming devices. Blu-Ray players are already designed to be upgradeable and extensible to new streaming standards.
Furthermore I'm pretty sure Heritage sites are attached to UNESCO funding. So it also strikes me as a not-too-subtle attempt to lock in money to guarantee its survival.
Ummm.. so you're giving customers time tables and then you're missing them?
Sounds like the recipe for a bad review. Crazy idea. *Factor in* the fact that you will have other customers and it might rain during the construction process before giving estimates/bids.
Computer hardware requirements continually change. Better graphics, more RAM etc etc...
A Blu-Ray player decodes 1080p streams of h264 or AVC. That's incidentally exactly all that a streaming movie player needs to do as well.
Unless the TV magically upgrades to 4k or a streaming service uses a codec that is far more intensive than H264 or AVC it should have all the hardware it'll ever need.
Or Netflix will work with the ISPs like NBC did for the Olympics and setup caches in the ISP server room.
You couldn't update a VCR to play DVDs. You can update an Android or Windows 7 Embedded TV to run Netflix 2.0
I'm not at all sure of this. A TV has a lifespan of many years and is quite expensive. These boxes are cheap. I picked up a WD box for $100. Sure, my next TV will probably do everything this box does. But where will I be 2-3 years after my next TV. Will the TV have the processing power to keep up? Will the manufacturer keep putting out new versions of the software for 10 years after I bought the TV? Doubtful.
No but you'll be able to buy a "Blu-Ray" player which is updated. How often you use the blu-ray functionality vs the Netflix functionality has yet to be seen but the Blu-Ray player makers will offer something Roku can't: Blu Rays.
I don't know if you have noticed but every passenger on an airliner pays about $20 in airport taxes per trip. I have to believe that it covers a good chunk of the air traffic control system.
It is just a new stepping stone, with most of the energy to get there coming from electric motors hauling you up to the stationary orbit.
Wasn't there a space elevator test from a helicopter where they found the wire itself generated a pretty large voltage potential from earth's magnetic field?
"Strawman = Burned"
I didn't say Search Engine Traffic = Piracy. I said 99.9% of search engine traffic is piracy. Congratulations you're the .1% nice to meet you.
(I also use EZTV to check if a TV show is airing tonight, so I'm certainly guilty of not pirating something every time I visit myself.) But only because I'm so... uhhh... familiar with EZTV's interface? :P
Yes I did. My brain did string substitution for KickAssTorrents. They use a similar font and styling for their banner.
Ok so TorrentFreak doesn't facilitate piracy. But my point is that 99.9% of torrent search engine traffic is piracy.
And yet I'm sure you still want to watch our TV programs, movies, listen to our music and install our software.
Look, I'm all against egregious uses of government against innocent people. But Torrent Freaks is 99.9% designed to facilitate piracy. And unless you have a plan for a business model where you can still get $80m projects developed and executed for you then I'm not going to bemoan on principle someone wanting to profit from their efforts. IP while being free to copy isn't free to produce. There are real tangible costs to producing art--often very high costs when you're talking about media. A kickstarter page and $50k isn't going to create an episode of Game of Thrones.
Whether these websites actually hosted material might make a legal distinction but let's be real fucking honest for a moment, when I got KickassTorrents or PirateBay, I'm doing so with the intent to break the law. Now I think the law should punish you like a parking ticket or speeding--both of which I also do--but I don't take some high and mighty bullshit immature whining fest because The Man impeded my freedom to speed. If I was speeding... I was speeding. I'm going to try and avoid cops and do everything my power to avoid getting a ticket but I'm not going to say the US Government Pol Pot for enforcing a principle which I do actually agree with. I agree in principle that the city needs to charge for parking. And I've crossed my fingers before and ran into a store because I didn't want to bother walking back to the meter to feed it.
We'll happily stop censoring the world when the world pays for all of our products that they use.
Ahhh yes the Dutch golden age where everyone had a smart phone and plasma TV and all their vehicles ran on tulips.
But all too often IT puts these level of draconian stops on systems which don't need to touch anything secure.
In my opinion this should all be handled at the application level and the hardware level not the OS/Device level.
Reduce your security attack vectors. If you plug in a completely compromised system they should have no-where to go. If they download an encrypted file off of the file server then that file should be encrypted and rely on separate hardware. For instance I don't want to encumber my personal phone with IT security lock down nonsense so I only access our services through the web offerings. With a two authentication system in place you could limit what a person pulls down when from the servers. Never let any device anywhere pull down every single record to the device. Keep the application running in a sandbox/VM.
99% of your users don't even touch sensitive data. So the fact that they are milling around with the same security privilege is wasteful.
You might get a slightly higher rate of security breaches but they would be for very small chunks of data. Maybe you would lose 2-3 customers' information. Instead of 30 million.
Treat every computer that connects to the castle fortress that is your server as an enemy. And only serve up the thing they ask for--not access to entire file shares.
But that was just proof of a developer 'future proofing' their work so that even on computers that hadn't been created yet people would continue to get advances without re-releasing a new game/engine.
Crysis has grown and evolved along with the hardware over the last 4 years. Now we can play Crysis as it *could have looked* 4 years ago. So we're still getting an evolving product without the developer having to do anything.
Despite how much the Slashdot and Gamer community decries DLC... it's kind of to 'blame' in my opinion.
I still play TF2 more than anything else. It was released in October 2007 and it still feels fresh.
We're not only stagnating on the engines our games run on... we're not even necessarily playing new games.
Hardware manufacturers aren't the only ones who are realizing that it's more profitable to hold onto what you've already made and just make more of it.
Sticking to the current Source Engine has probably saved Valve a boatload of money. Epic Games has continued to improve Unreal Engine 3. But it's mostly be evolutionary add-ons and optimizations for multiple platforms. They're able to ship more copies of UE3 without having to re-invent the wheel.
We're also going to hit a bottleneck. With rasterization every little effect and feature is a unique hack. In order to have those hacks work together is a nightmare. And then artists have to spend a significant portion of their time optimizing their assets for a rasterized pipeline.
I think we're hitting the limits of what people can manage to keep straight with rasterization. The future is raytracing in my opinion--it's just too slow at this very second. But it's fundamentally far simpler and easy to create content for. You want a reflective material. Great. Create a ray. Shoot it in the reflection vector. Once it hits something it'll follow that shader's properties. And so on and so forth.
Lighting, shading, rendering, effects.... it's all easy and straightforward to write. It's just kind of slow. Maybe Caustic's OpenRL and Optix will fix that in the future. Time will tell. But the status quo is an unfortunate dead weight hanging around the advancement of image fidelity.
I goof off, check my facebook status, chat with friends, shop and goof off. But in return I don't put the same 9-5 mentality in. The transition from work to leisure is far less obvious.
If your friends are at work and you get work done with them--but also goof off then you're less likely to go home at 5pm sharp.
The 9-5, Mon-Fri mentality is breaking down with Gen-Z. And with good reason--it's not how many hours you put in--it's what you deliver. If someone is incredibly efficient but has no aspirations of higher pay or promotion. Great! they get to goof off more and spend their time how they please, I could care less.
But more to the point, users are far more tech savvy than they used to be. And IT departments are by and large paranoid assholes. Admittedly most people are conversely stupid chimpanzees but that's changing and IT needs to learn to adapt. The perfect case is my brother in law who works for a large fortune 500 who shall not be named who just within the last year or two upgraded *TO* Windows XP from 2000. And just very recently upgraded IE6 to IE7 on all corporate laptops.
His login times are literally 14-15 minutes on a laptop. He's not necessarily a Geek but he's certainly competent enough to run the computers in his household. If you just provided a laptop with secure access to Outlook and a File Share he would be fine.
We run into situations constantly where corporate machines at client organizations don't even have Quicktime. I'm sorry, yes it takes more work, yes you'll be removing bonzai buddy but the expenses of lost productivity as people lose *actual revenue generating work* because their computers seem to have popped out of 1996 is the far greater cost to the company than a policy of perhaps extra laptops with a low payed intern ghosting them back to workable again.
Takes too long and is unworkable. If I had to figure out that gravity would pull me downwards I would have broken all of my legs multiple times.
We do this little thing called "learning" that teaches us to recognize situations or objects which are similar to others and we can transpose characteristics we know from past experience onto new experiences. It's the fundamental basis of our intellect and intelligence. You can look at a Ford Taurus and know that it's a car. That cars generally travel on roads. And that you shouldn't walk in front of them. If you judged each car differently then you would have to re-learn the entire traffic system to remain safe. It's untenable.
If someone looks like a hippie then they 95% of the time generally fit into hippie culture. I've never run into a conservative right wingnut who has dreadlocks and natural fiber clothes.
There are also cultures. I have a bunch of French friends. They're definitely united by a common culture. I can't easily recognize a Frenchman from an Italian on the street but I certainly have a baseline expectation for people with a French upbringing. And I from experience know how to adapt to interact best with their mannerisms. Countries and cultures have personalities. Not everyone matches one personality obviously but the range tends to be skewed in one direction.
Most people the world over are generally pretty similar at some level. Starting from species and working our way through culture, sub-cultures and ultimately individual personality you're getting progressively less insightful about the variation.
Two random hippies are probably more similar than a shy Hippie and a shy Glenn Beck aficionado.
The trouble is when you start putting unjustified qualifiers on it.
"Hippies can't came up with any practical ideas. They're useless bums.
They contribute nothing to society.
They're just leeches."
"Right Wingnuts hate poor people.
They are incapable of intelligent though.
They abhor human rights."
Often we mis-attribute motivations to people. "African Americans have higher unemployment because they're Lazy."
"Or there is another underlying social cause that's preventing them from finding employment or disproportionately eliminating the jobs that they previously had."
If you simply ignore the fact that African Americans *are* factually experiencing higher unemployment then you will never figure out why it's occurring and what can be done to fix it. It's not judgmental, since you're still operating from the basic assumption that we're all pretty much the same as far as personality goes genetically--but culturally and socially we by and large still have a notably different upbringing.
So then you have to start refining to figure out specifically which group of African Americans are disproportionately unemployed. If you go across economic lines is it affecting everyone with dark skin (implying it's purely a racial discrimination problem) or is it only affecting the poorer African Americans? Etc...
If you put too great of an emphasis on individual analysis starting from a completely blank slate you'll spend an eternity just getting to the interesting distinguishing factors.
For instance I would describe my dad as a "University philosophy teacher who lives to paint." There are only four descriptive words in there, but I think if you decompressed the sub-cultures and connotations you would probably be able to extract a relatively accurate caricature. It certainly lacks nuance but you would be about 95% right.
I can nearly very accurately describe myself in even less characters: ENTP. If you start from that assumption you would not be far off in your assumptions about me.
Actually Baptists are more complicated. Unlike most denominations Baptists are founded on the principle that there *is no central authority*. Yes you can choose to associate yourself with baptists or not, and yes he probably was just statistically speaking but unlike another denomination Baptism was founded on the principle that every preacher had their own authority to interpret scripture and preach the word as inspired to them.
And many Baptists hold the notion of permanent salvation. So if you at some point in your life accept Jesus then you're saved regardless of your future activity. It's more complicated than that.. but that's the general idea--at least in some baptist circles.
So yes they might kick you out of seminary... but you could just go to another "Baptist" seminary that you set up and become a "Baptist" minister that teachers Evolution. It's quite democratic and 'free market' compared to other denominations.
-Atheist w/ ex-Baptist Brother in Law w/ Baptist Preacher father.
Except Xerox is a unique word, that was uniquely created by Xerox for the express purpose of their machines.
App dates back *AT LEAST* to 1989 and even then it wasn't trademarked by Apple and was considered a generic term for an "application" or "program". Nobody called a "Killer Prog".
http://books.google.com/books?id=uTAEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PT83#v=onepage&q=app&f=false
Not the generic--non Apple implication usage of "Killer App". In reference to OS/2 no-less.
Apple has never defended the word "App" as a trademark. It's been used extensively in print and by corporations the world over. "Killer App" "Mobile App" "Web App". It's been in use for well over 2 decades.
So if we can conclude that the word "App" is generic and indefensible then combining it with a descriptor for the place where one buys apps as a store-- it's no less generic.
App (Generic) + Store (Generic) == Generic.
If however Apple had decided to name its iPhone apps something new and unique as a term for an app like... "Dot" then they could trademark it. "Dot, a trademarked term to name Applications for the iOS." They could then call it a Dot Store and limit its usage to computer software and be safe.
Apple chose the word "App" because that's what everybody already called Apps. We called them apps when they were on windows ce, palmOS, Windows, Linux, OS9, the web... the world over when you said "App" to someone who used a computer knew what you were talking about. And they weren't thinking of something that only ran on a Mac or was trademarked by Apple.
Here is a webpage that in 2003 thought Windows CE appplications were called "Apps"
http://web.archive.org/web/20030409022106/http://www.freefunfiles.com/software/pda/windowsceapplications/index.html
Just to beat your head with the obvious some more, here is a webpage updated in September 1999 talking about Windows CE "Apps"
http://www.angelfire.com/bc/bcox/windowsdna.html
It could be a single-user app running under Windows CE on a 3Com Palm Pilot.
I disagree. I think things have gotten dramatically easier.
I can learn Android or iOS in about 3 minutes. It would take me a good hour or two to program a VCR.
Navigating my Home Theater Receiver's menus is an effort in rage inducing frustration. Why? Because it is limited 640x480 and it is designed by someone who loathes the user--or so I assume. If it was HD and like Windows Phone 7 or iOS it would be easy and obvious.
A standard which I can currently only plugin to an Apple computer but not PCs? DOA.
Portable HDDs are supposed to be portable. Part of portability is working on multiple platforms. Until Intel gets their PC release in line it's only going to be used by those who know they'll only ever want their data on a Mac.
Well not only that but you can never be fine grained enough for the user to understand.
If your app saves data to the cloud then it needs the ability to "Copy files to remote servers".
That's either a trojan or the app operating correctly. No way to tell without per-file transaction confirmations. "I'm about to move a temp.dat to the cloud. Ok?" And even then. "Wait, what's in temp.dat?" And so on and so forth.
The only difference between a malicious network aware application and a good one is what data is being transferred.
It's like a webcam app. "This app will access your camera and transmit video across the internet."
Perfect!
But there is no way to secure that video so that they couldn't also store a copy on their servers and post it to voyeuristic sites. The only security in such a situation would be a physical tag over your camera lens.
Phones are designed to transmit and share your data. They're essentially designed to be exploited.
Considering domestic spying has been mostly directed at leftist dissidents (Martin Luther King Jr, War Protesters, 'Communist sympathizers' etc...) I find it odd that you would be considered a progressive cause. Doubly questionable since most of the people *fighting* the Patriot Act in the first place were leftist progressives.
It's not a question of whether or not the command line terminal can do the same things, it still could, it's a question of how you build those terminal scripts.
SQL Queries for instance are pretty obtuse but there are some great tools to help you build them with interactive results.
Why I can't for instance just type ' Move "//path/file.ext" to "//newpath/" instead of mv etc... boggles my mind.
Sure mv is shorter. But why not offer an 'easy' path for those who don't have the shortened commands memorized? Is it really so hard to ignore the "to". It helps people interact with the computer more naturally and it takes an extra 1 second to type. It takes me more than a second to remember mv.