They aren't a monopoly in operating systems anymore. Hunh?
Did I miss the year of the Linux desktop already? Where are the competitors who are selling operating systems for the same platforms in numbers that you can see on the same scale as MS?
The smelly hippies claim 60 miles a day, not 20. And the EV-1 was more than capable of that. What battery problems need to be solved that wouldn't be solved by mass marketing the car? There are plenty of systems in current production cars that get refined year by year. Look at air bags, antilock brakes, anti-theft systems and so on... Heck do you remember when seat belts used to clamp down and never let up?
My point is that you sell the cars to the market that wants them and work year by year to make the product better. Standing there saying that there are some unknown problems to be worked out never made anyone a buck.
The guy could easily have created Wikipedia as a for-profit enterprise. Hindsight's 20/20. If he had created it as a for-profit enterprise then would there have been nearly the same participation levels? It wouldn't be in the position it is today if it were created for-profit and we wouldn't be having this discussion.
I think there has to be some other ISV (note the MS name for software vendors other than themselves) to come up with a new SVG binary behaviour to actually enable that kind of rendering. Adobe SVG viewer is pretty much abandoned last I heard. I don't know what motivation anyone would have to develop another plugin for IE that they basically would have no way of making any return off of. Then there's just the fact that people need a plugin that would further hold back any penetration compared to Silverlight.
So the situation as I see it is still pretty grim. There's a tiny window open but it's not enough to get anything through as far as I see it.
I have to say I'm not surprised but it's still a real bummer. They mention SVG (along with MathML & others) in the section on recognizing namespaces but they don't imply that they'll support it. It does sound like it could be possible to have a helper (Behaviour I think they called it) that could render inline SVG with the appropriate namespace in an XHTML document. I'm too far out of that loop to know for sure if that's a realistic possibility though.
I get the feeling that they're going down the path they have so many times before where there's one level of support for their version of something (in this case Silverlight) and a second-class level of support for "everybody else" (in this case SVG). So that if we do get some third-party to support SVG in IE via an approved MS mechanism, it'll be as an alternative to Silverlight.
Nobody suggested any restrictions on who could unlock it other than the implicit test of being able to visit your ISP's web site and click fill in a form that says "unblock ports 1-1024". I think that'd be a pretty decent compromise. It's certainly better than flat-out blocking that many do now and could be seen as just another firewall that helps protect the rest of us from your idiot neighbours. A firewall that I configure is better than the current firewall that the ISP configures for me since today there's nobody in tech support there that can unblock a specific port for me.
Alternatively, if you have a plan with actionable steps for removing the idiots from the train then please get started on it.
Fwiw my ISP teksavvy is small enough to be helpful and doesn't do any of the evil stuff afaik.
Wtf? Not saying the parent is right or wrong but how the hell do you get the idea that most people in Detroit or Washington or even a large number of those people think that murder is okay? I assume you're using those two places because of the higher crime and murder rates but by no means is it comparable to the situation with file sharing.
Besides that the laws around copyright and copyright infringement are a lot more complicated than the idea that killing someone is wrong.
I guess I shouldn't even have justified this comment with a response but I'm just blown away that it somehow got modded insightful...
No, not opened or Opened. Don't play into that. Being able to read the source doesn't make it open, capital letter or not. It just means you can see the source and read it. The word has been beaten down by marketing nonsense to the point where it's losing all its meaning. The term open implies the ability to have some control. This is quite the opposite. If you satisfy yourself with such a tiny semantic change then you can spend all your time on semantics and none doing anything useful. Refute the misuse of the word and go on with more important matters.
The fact is, once Moonlight is up and rolling, there's no need for Microsoft's support to continue keeping it up to date. If they add some new function blah(x,y) they have to document that function in order for Silverlight users to actually make use of it, which means writing your own version of blah(x,y) from scratch wouldn't be that big of a deal.
I'm sorry, something I can probably reverse engineer is not a substitute for something that is open. By this logic Wine should be a perfect replacement for Windows and GCJ should be interchangeable with the Sun JVM. I respect both of these efforts but the fact is that they are not in control of the specs they are implementing.
In the case of Silverlight there's no compelling reason to move from standards we have to this new specification.
Of course it's easier to install OS X: the same people that bring you the software also own the hardware designs. They don't have to install on any old orange. Just apples.
Not sure what the parent said that set you off but don't forget that large cities are still growing. Encouraging cities in more hospitable climates to grow would reduce the amount of energy needed to heat and cool them. You don't have to move everybody who lives in a cold place to make a difference, just encourage growth in those warmer places. Of course the problem then becomes one of political boundaries - NYC wouldn't be happy if there were a federal tax incentive to encourage people to leave for Atlanta.
On a related note, in Canada we have a tax deduction called the Northern Residents deductions. This could really be seen as a way of encouraging people to use more energy.
He does mention near the beginning of the video I watched that when you set up the wiimote you have to be sure it has an unobstructed view of the pointers. It's near the same time he says the wiimote has a 40 degree (iirc) field of vision and the further away it is the less resolution you get.
a fix to this could be to put the projector below a table and project upwards (inverted) on a glass surface so there is no change of LOSing any of the pointers.
I actually thought that was where he'd go with it.
Yeah they've had some flops but they also had the 3.5" floppy, the CD (as part of a partnership), Hi-8, and S-PDIF (with Phillips). Personally I prefer open standards and Sony does have a history of trying to push more closed ones than open.
Okay, so why does it bother you that I'm asking for a short synonym to describe this particular use of the word "free?"
If it happens only once then I see no problem with the long description. This set of terms for use comes up many times over now and I'm sure that the on the other side of the advertisement the advertising developers have a name for it. So why don't you want to have an easy way for the consumers to talk about this without confusing it with many other similar uses of the word "free?"
I can't tell if you're intentionally ignoring my point or missing it. The marketing of products as free doesn't distinguish between who pays or what the costs are. It could be free of charge to the customer or free in many other ways. Many advertising techniques hinge on our combining the many meanings of the word "free" and for us to have a reasonable discussion of the merits of the product or service we need to have words to describe these different meanings. If it takes a really long phrase like "free of charge to the consumer but paid for by advertisers" then that will often be abbreviated to "free" which derails the discussion. Similarly, using the really long phrase "free of charge to the consumer but paid for by advertisers" slows down discussion to the point that it won't happen.
Because you can't just contribute once to Wikipedia...
In the sample image they show the user is logged in to their Google Account. They also repeat several times the idea of 'highlighting the author.' Similarly, they talk about a revenue-share with writers. You can't send money to 'Anonymous Coward'. This doesn't sound like a one-time posting thing to me.
Instead of arguing about this we need to get a proper term for this advertisement-supported stuff which is called "free" by the company who benefits. We can all see that there's clearly a benefit to the company (Google in this case) and that there's some kind of burden or cost that is non-monetary for the recipient. As long as we keep arguing over whether it fits a definition of "free" then we can never get in to the deeper questions of whether it's morally okay, what the consequences of the service will be or what standards should apply to services provided under these terms.
So tell me what we call it (and make it short enough) and let's get on with figuring out what we think about "free 2.0" services.
Part of HTML5 is about getting widely implemented features realized as written-down standards. I think that specifying the encoder is in line with that goal. It fits with naming support for PNG and WAVE files.
Sunlight Foundation funds a lot of projects with goals of transparency. Their big thing right now is apparently earmarks but look at the projects they give grants to and you might find what you want.
I wonder if Verizon's support for Android devices is indirectly due to Java's general acceptance as a mobile platform (J2ME) Android uses Java Standard Edition, not Micro. And I don't see much foundation for that speculation: Android is built on Java not the other way around.
their confidence that a whole OS based on it will be solid enough to provide predictable support for it. There's no OS built on Java here. The emulator runs a custom JVM on top of Linux.
I don't see why Sprint and T-Mobile wouldn't follow suit eventually. Sprint and T-Mobile are already members (as I think other comments have pointed out).
Slashdot Mirror
Did I miss the year of the Linux desktop already? Where are the competitors who are selling operating systems for the same platforms in numbers that you can see on the same scale as MS?
The smelly hippies claim 60 miles a day, not 20. And the EV-1 was more than capable of that. What battery problems need to be solved that wouldn't be solved by mass marketing the car? There are plenty of systems in current production cars that get refined year by year. Look at air bags, antilock brakes, anti-theft systems and so on... Heck do you remember when seat belts used to clamp down and never let up?
My point is that you sell the cars to the market that wants them and work year by year to make the product better. Standing there saying that there are some unknown problems to be worked out never made anyone a buck.
Because we all know it's impossible for a lobbiest to write a bill and pass it to their favorite government official to sponsor.
He didn't say boisterous, He said Batshit-Loco.
I think there has to be some other ISV (note the MS name for software vendors other than themselves) to come up with a new SVG binary behaviour to actually enable that kind of rendering. Adobe SVG viewer is pretty much abandoned last I heard. I don't know what motivation anyone would have to develop another plugin for IE that they basically would have no way of making any return off of. Then there's just the fact that people need a plugin that would further hold back any penetration compared to Silverlight.
So the situation as I see it is still pretty grim. There's a tiny window open but it's not enough to get anything through as far as I see it.
I have to say I'm not surprised but it's still a real bummer. They mention SVG (along with MathML & others) in the section on recognizing namespaces but they don't imply that they'll support it. It does sound like it could be possible to have a helper (Behaviour I think they called it) that could render inline SVG with the appropriate namespace in an XHTML document. I'm too far out of that loop to know for sure if that's a realistic possibility though.
I get the feeling that they're going down the path they have so many times before where there's one level of support for their version of something (in this case Silverlight) and a second-class level of support for "everybody else" (in this case SVG). So that if we do get some third-party to support SVG in IE via an approved MS mechanism, it'll be as an alternative to Silverlight.
Nobody suggested any restrictions on who could unlock it other than the implicit test of being able to visit your ISP's web site and click fill in a form that says "unblock ports 1-1024". I think that'd be a pretty decent compromise. It's certainly better than flat-out blocking that many do now and could be seen as just another firewall that helps protect the rest of us from your idiot neighbours. A firewall that I configure is better than the current firewall that the ISP configures for me since today there's nobody in tech support there that can unblock a specific port for me.
Alternatively, if you have a plan with actionable steps for removing the idiots from the train then please get started on it.
Fwiw my ISP teksavvy is small enough to be helpful and doesn't do any of the evil stuff afaik.
Wtf? Not saying the parent is right or wrong but how the hell do you get the idea that most people in Detroit or Washington or even a large number of those people think that murder is okay? I assume you're using those two places because of the higher crime and murder rates but by no means is it comparable to the situation with file sharing.
Besides that the laws around copyright and copyright infringement are a lot more complicated than the idea that killing someone is wrong.
I guess I shouldn't even have justified this comment with a response but I'm just blown away that it somehow got modded insightful...
Good advice. I made a couple search plugins for Firefox to help with that. There's one for OpenSecrets.org and one for the Library of Congress THOMAS system (bills and legislative information).
No, not opened or Opened. Don't play into that. Being able to read the source doesn't make it open, capital letter or not. It just means you can see the source and read it. The word has been beaten down by marketing nonsense to the point where it's losing all its meaning. The term open implies the ability to have some control. This is quite the opposite. If you satisfy yourself with such a tiny semantic change then you can spend all your time on semantics and none doing anything useful. Refute the misuse of the word and go on with more important matters.
I'm sorry, something I can probably reverse engineer is not a substitute for something that is open. By this logic Wine should be a perfect replacement for Windows and GCJ should be interchangeable with the Sun JVM. I respect both of these efforts but the fact is that they are not in control of the specs they are implementing.
In the case of Silverlight there's no compelling reason to move from standards we have to this new specification.
Of course it's easier to install OS X: the same people that bring you the software also own the hardware designs. They don't have to install on any old orange. Just apples.
Not sure what the parent said that set you off but don't forget that large cities are still growing. Encouraging cities in more hospitable climates to grow would reduce the amount of energy needed to heat and cool them. You don't have to move everybody who lives in a cold place to make a difference, just encourage growth in those warmer places. Of course the problem then becomes one of political boundaries - NYC wouldn't be happy if there were a federal tax incentive to encourage people to leave for Atlanta.
On a related note, in Canada we have a tax deduction called the Northern Residents deductions. This could really be seen as a way of encouraging people to use more energy.
a fix to this could be to put the projector below a table and project upwards (inverted) on a glass surface so there is no change of LOSing any of the pointers.
I actually thought that was where he'd go with it.
Yeah they've had some flops but they also had the 3.5" floppy, the CD (as part of a partnership), Hi-8, and S-PDIF (with Phillips). Personally I prefer open standards and Sony does have a history of trying to push more closed ones than open.
Okay, so why does it bother you that I'm asking for a short synonym to describe this particular use of the word "free?"
If it happens only once then I see no problem with the long description. This set of terms for use comes up many times over now and I'm sure that the on the other side of the advertisement the advertising developers have a name for it. So why don't you want to have an easy way for the consumers to talk about this without confusing it with many other similar uses of the word "free?"
I can't tell if you're intentionally ignoring my point or missing it. The marketing of products as free doesn't distinguish between who pays or what the costs are. It could be free of charge to the customer or free in many other ways. Many advertising techniques hinge on our combining the many meanings of the word "free" and for us to have a reasonable discussion of the merits of the product or service we need to have words to describe these different meanings. If it takes a really long phrase like "free of charge to the consumer but paid for by advertisers" then that will often be abbreviated to "free" which derails the discussion. Similarly, using the really long phrase "free of charge to the consumer but paid for by advertisers" slows down discussion to the point that it won't happen.
So why don't you want this discussion to happen?
Now that they've read it on your website, they can go back to Google, paste it in there and nobody ever has to click through to your site again.
Because you can't just contribute once to Wikipedia...
In the sample image they show the user is logged in to their Google Account. They also repeat several times the idea of 'highlighting the author.' Similarly, they talk about a revenue-share with writers. You can't send money to 'Anonymous Coward'. This doesn't sound like a one-time posting thing to me.
Instead of arguing about this we need to get a proper term for this advertisement-supported stuff which is called "free" by the company who benefits. We can all see that there's clearly a benefit to the company (Google in this case) and that there's some kind of burden or cost that is non-monetary for the recipient. As long as we keep arguing over whether it fits a definition of "free" then we can never get in to the deeper questions of whether it's morally okay, what the consequences of the service will be or what standards should apply to services provided under these terms.
So tell me what we call it (and make it short enough) and let's get on with figuring out what we think about "free 2.0" services.
Part of HTML5 is about getting widely implemented features realized as written-down standards. I think that specifying the encoder is in line with that goal. It fits with naming support for PNG and WAVE files.
Not sure where you got that idea from. Android Media APIs and MotionEvent for handling "movement (mouse, pen, finger) events."
Sunlight Foundation funds a lot of projects with goals of transparency. Their big thing right now is apparently earmarks but look at the projects they give grants to and you might find what you want.