...which is exactly why there is not open-source online community. Geeks develop OSS, but geeks don't need these social sites--they're for the masses. Those who would, in theory, build them would rather rant about IPv6.
That's an interesting take. Being a tried-and-true Mac fanboi, I must admit Apple is worse at this than Microsoft. OS X gets updates almost yearly, all of which are for-pay.
You've obviously never worked in IT at a University. Here's a list of reasons, taken from a single year in IT at a small college in Michigan. Detailing why, sadly, this argument is out of touch.
Science faculty demand that they can run Mac OS 9 because half of their science programs don't have open-source/linux versions.
English professor has written all of his academic papers, lecture notes, and 3/4 of a novel in WordPerfect. Version 5.
Psychology professor writes his world-reknown applications in Visual Basic.
Office staff, when confronted with a Mac interface, spend two minutes repeatedly clicking the little bar in the top-right, trying to make the window disappear. They can't use something that doesn't look like they're home computer.
Doing phone tech support, you ask the calling professor whether he's using a PC or a Mac. He pauses, reads the label on his monitor, and confidently states, "a Mitsubishi!"
The database package that holds all student information only has a Windows client.
Try finding linux drivers for an Epson Pro wide-format printer.
Try teaching anyone to use a command line.
Try telling a student web developer he can't test his pages on the the majority browser.
The communications/new media/art departments want to develop with the Adobe Products they'll be using on their jobs.
Universities are a terrible place to force Linux adoption because you're dealing with over-inflated egos and ridiculously intense politics. You've got to satisfy the the demands of both the ultra-early-adopters and the entrenched ludites, not to mention very strict security policies and hardware support/maintenance. IT at a university requires flexibility and agility. It's not like a company or government, which can throw down a decision everyone else has to deal with.
Believe me. Upgrading to Windows XP and Mac OS X was like pulling teeth at my institution, half a decade after they were released. Change within the ivory tower is not a simple process.
The "Steve" membership will cost twice as much as the "Bill" membership, but will require no configuration, have longer uptimes, and all of its interfaces will be so damn pretty.
Slashdot is a poor example a site worth keeping tabs on with RSS. It changes so fast that your feed reader would have to be aggregating 24-7 to get all of the stories.
I read quite a few web developers' blogs in order to keep up with the industry. Many of these bloggers post new ideas or techniques every week or so. This is where RSS really shines. Thunderbird (my RSS reader of choice) downloads each post and announces it similarly to an email message, and caches a record of it as such. I can't be bothered to check up on 10-20 web sites every day, only to find that one, maybe two has changed. Instead, my feed reader does this for me. I keep connected, can cache and file articles I like, and don't have to constantly be checking unchanged web sites.
I am of the firm belief that any web site that contains information updated on a semi-regular basis should have a syndication feed behind it. I makes no sense to update information and then hope that your readers will find their way to it; create a feed that users can subscribe to, and pull that information themselves.
Man: I don't know about this whole car thing, I'm not going to use it very often. Car salesman: This car is $15,000. Man: Now that paved roads are everywhere and my job is five miles away, I need a car and I'll use it every day. Car salesman: Ok, well now cars cost $20,000.
The price of goods increases as their value to customers increases...it's supply and demand.
I just wrote a webpage that includes XForms, SVG, XHTML 1.1, and SMIL... and according to Slashdot, if you just code to the standards, it'll magically work in every browser! I'm so confused!
Me too! I just released a movie on BluRay and HD-DVD and a album on 45" vinyl and 8-track, but no one can play my stuff! Standards aren't enough--it's current industry standards that are important. This is why web sites need to be updated every 4 years or so. HTML 3.2 was okay in 1998, but the industry has moved on, as should your thinking.
This "code to the standards" Slashdot mantra really irks me. You guys do realize that even if you write to the standard, it's inevitable that you won't get pixel-perfect pages in every standards-compliant browser, right? Or you may run up against rendering bugs that make "100% standards compliant" pages look different from browser to browser.
Please explain to me why I want a pixel-perfect page on my cell phone or pda, or why I want it to look exactly the same on the page as on the screen. Why would you want the same visual information on the printed page as on the screen? Explain to my grandfather with glaucoma why this IE-only page nails everything down to low-contrast, 12-point font. Explain to my blind cousin why he can't have the information read to him in a standardized way? Explain to my father with a 5-year old computer why he's horizontally scrolling the page on his 800 x 600 monitor, then to me why I can't read any of the tiny words on my 30" flat panel.
Pixel-perfection was never the goal of HTML or the web. It's uniformed and uncreative designers who have pigeon-holed it there.
But, at the end of the day, science has given us medicines and therapies that actually work
Possible side effects of this opinion may include heart burn, loose bowels, indigestion, gas, hair loss, sexual side effects, and death. Do not take this opinion if you have cancer or may be pregnant. Certain other opinions may conflict with this opinion. A blood test may be required to detect possible liver damage. Always consult the web before buying into this opinion. See our add in Lifestyle magazine.
You've obviously not worked with non-computer-types before. I use the word computer-types because computer-savvy does not accurately describe the phenomenon, an Individual who:
may be (but often is not) very good with computers
may (but often does not) use a computer every day
may (but often does not) invest a lot of money into their own personal computer.
Yet
Does not read warning dialogues, merely clicks "Ok" through each
Cannot user or locate preferences, configuration or options
Forgets about the second mouse button
Refuses to learn anything other than the click-this-to-do-that
Expects it to work, all of the time, no matter what
Likes fun things like Bonzi buddies and weatherBugs
Will not remember a new task that has more than 3 steps until they have done it four or five times with instruction.
These sort of people are the majority of computer users, and they operate on the Anton (not Pavel) Chekov theory of computer use: if there is a file attachment over the mantle in act one, it must be opened by act three.
These people are the reason why I only recommend Macs--because their system offers a lot more built-in protection between the keyboard and chair, and their software is (for the most part) easy enough to teach gradually and without a jarring, frustrating or confusing experience.
I highly doubt something like this will happen. If the RIAA can sue a college student for creating a search appliance over local area network that indexed files of many types--not just music, they will definately not allow a similar search of the entire interweb.
I disagree. It's Everyone Loves Raymond, and I can write it in one line of code:
while (lengthOfShow<30) echo somethingNotFunny();
Re:I don't really like PHP that much...
on
A Decade of PHP
·
· Score: 1
I don't know what you're talking about. While driving down the freeway I see all sorts of billboards with smiling people that tout, "I <3 my PHP!" It's obviously caught on and become way mainstream.
So, say this bill gets passed. Wonderful. I write a software application containing code that I keep under copyright, perhaps an open one. I blog about what I'm doing, perhaps sharing some code snippets. Later on, that code is taken by another entity, and the process is patented as a new invention. We both publish this code. I see what the other entity is doing and sue him for copyright infringement. He, in turn, sues me for patent infringement. He has more money for lawyers than me. Can I be sued for exercising my own copyright?
I did say almost. And most of the people I've met were from various Europe. Sure they'd like to come to the U.S., but it couldn't compare to Sweden's freedoms, or Italy's beauty, or...
Believe it or not, there are countries where most people constantly bitch about their government (and indeed their country).
That would imply that bitching about the governement is unpatriotic. I believe quite the opposite. I'll agree with you that Americans extoll some of the most blind, absurd and at time hypocritical patriotism, but we definately don't have a monopoly on nationalism.
This would be insightful, were it not for the fact that almost every person I've met, no matter where they are from, believes that their country is the best.
I think it's hard for non-Jewish and non-Hindus (like me) to understand the idea of purity and sanctity in the same way that these two faiths do. Especially Christians in the US, where many would print their book on toilet paper if they thought it would be read first.
Aside from keeping the text accurate, in order to be practiced properly, nothing of religious use should be said to be "spoiled"--even the person, hence the rules regarding which foods and materials are clean and unclean.
Of course the strictness of this varies, but its an extra facet that you will not see in many other faiths.
Slashdot Mirror
...which is exactly why there is not open-source online community. Geeks develop OSS, but geeks don't need these social sites--they're for the masses. Those who would, in theory, build them would rather rant about IPv6.
Indeed. Point being M$ is not the only OS-maker which uses versioning and API upgrades/changes as a revenue stream.
That's an interesting take. Being a tried-and-true Mac fanboi, I must admit Apple is worse at this than Microsoft. OS X gets updates almost yearly, all of which are for-pay.
You've obviously never worked in IT at a University. Here's a list of reasons, taken from a single year in IT at a small college in Michigan. Detailing why, sadly, this argument is out of touch.
Universities are a terrible place to force Linux adoption because you're dealing with over-inflated egos and ridiculously intense politics. You've got to satisfy the the demands of both the ultra-early-adopters and the entrenched ludites, not to mention very strict security policies and hardware support/maintenance. IT at a university requires flexibility and agility. It's not like a company or government, which can throw down a decision everyone else has to deal with.
Believe me. Upgrading to Windows XP and Mac OS X was like pulling teeth at my institution, half a decade after they were released. Change within the ivory tower is not a simple process.
Unlike, you know, Hamas, which is now large part of a legitimately elected government that the US is trying to take down.
Mmm... tastes like hypocracy.
The "Steve" membership will cost twice as much as the "Bill" membership, but will require no configuration, have longer uptimes, and all of its interfaces will be so damn pretty.
Your point is a non-issue. The xsl:output element, and it's method attribute allow you to specify HTML output instead of XML.
Why have you imported DVDs? Are you a terrorist?
Slashdot is a poor example a site worth keeping tabs on with RSS. It changes so fast that your feed reader would have to be aggregating 24-7 to get all of the stories.
I read quite a few web developers' blogs in order to keep up with the industry. Many of these bloggers post new ideas or techniques every week or so. This is where RSS really shines. Thunderbird (my RSS reader of choice) downloads each post and announces it similarly to an email message, and caches a record of it as such. I can't be bothered to check up on 10-20 web sites every day, only to find that one, maybe two has changed. Instead, my feed reader does this for me. I keep connected, can cache and file articles I like, and don't have to constantly be checking unchanged web sites.
I am of the firm belief that any web site that contains information updated on a semi-regular basis should have a syndication feed behind it. I makes no sense to update information and then hope that your readers will find their way to it; create a feed that users can subscribe to, and pull that information themselves.
I worked with MS for a while, and their project managers use the milestone phrase "code complete" to mean that it's just testing and QA from there
Meaning, then, that the first release should only be a few days after?
That's because you've gotten it backwards.
Man: I don't know about this whole car thing, I'm not going to use it very often.
Car salesman: This car is $15,000.
Man: Now that paved roads are everywhere and my job is five miles away, I need a car and I'll use it every day.
Car salesman: Ok, well now cars cost $20,000.
The price of goods increases as their value to customers increases...it's supply and demand.
That's I'm the iTunes Music Store?
phobos.apple.whatever, I'm there!
I just wrote a webpage that includes XForms, SVG, XHTML 1.1, and SMIL... and according to Slashdot, if you just code to the standards, it'll magically work in every browser! I'm so confused!
Me too! I just released a movie on BluRay and HD-DVD and a album on 45" vinyl and 8-track, but no one can play my stuff! Standards aren't enough--it's current industry standards that are important. This is why web sites need to be updated every 4 years or so. HTML 3.2 was okay in 1998, but the industry has moved on, as should your thinking.
This "code to the standards" Slashdot mantra really irks me. You guys do realize that even if you write to the standard, it's inevitable that you won't get pixel-perfect pages in every standards-compliant browser, right? Or you may run up against rendering bugs that make "100% standards compliant" pages look different from browser to browser.
Please explain to me why I want a pixel-perfect page on my cell phone or pda, or why I want it to look exactly the same on the page as on the screen. Why would you want the same visual information on the printed page as on the screen? Explain to my grandfather with glaucoma why this IE-only page nails everything down to low-contrast, 12-point font. Explain to my blind cousin why he can't have the information read to him in a standardized way? Explain to my father with a 5-year old computer why he's horizontally scrolling the page on his 800 x 600 monitor, then to me why I can't read any of the tiny words on my 30" flat panel.
Pixel-perfection was never the goal of HTML or the web. It's uniformed and uncreative designers who have pigeon-holed it there.
I would rather we waited until IE does everything its supposed to do before moving any further
So 7 years isn't enough? Should we wait on Microsoft a full decade?
But, at the end of the day, science has given us medicines and therapies that actually work
Possible side effects of this opinion may include heart burn, loose bowels, indigestion, gas, hair loss, sexual side effects, and death. Do not take this opinion if you have cancer or may be pregnant. Certain other opinions may conflict with this opinion. A blood test may be required to detect possible liver damage. Always consult the web before buying into this opinion. See our add in Lifestyle magazine.
You've obviously not worked with non-computer-types before. I use the word computer-types because computer-savvy does not accurately describe the phenomenon, an Individual who:
Yet
These sort of people are the majority of computer users, and they operate on the Anton (not Pavel) Chekov theory of computer use: if there is a file attachment over the mantle in act one, it must be opened by act three.
These people are the reason why I only recommend Macs--because their system offers a lot more built-in protection between the keyboard and chair, and their software is (for the most part) easy enough to teach gradually and without a jarring, frustrating or confusing experience.
I highly doubt something like this will happen. If the RIAA can sue a college student for creating a search appliance over local area network that indexed files of many types--not just music, they will definately not allow a similar search of the entire interweb.
I disagree. It's Everyone Loves Raymond, and I can write it in one line of code:
I don't know what you're talking about. While driving down the freeway I see all sorts of billboards with smiling people that tout, "I <3 my PHP!" It's obviously caught on and become way mainstream.
So, say this bill gets passed. Wonderful. I write a software application containing code that I keep under copyright, perhaps an open one. I blog about what I'm doing, perhaps sharing some code snippets. Later on, that code is taken by another entity, and the process is patented as a new invention. We both publish this code. I see what the other entity is doing and sue him for copyright infringement. He, in turn, sues me for patent infringement. He has more money for lawyers than me. Can I be sued for exercising my own copyright?
I did say almost. And most of the people I've met were from various Europe. Sure they'd like to come to the U.S., but it couldn't compare to Sweden's freedoms, or Italy's beauty, or...
Believe it or not, there are countries where most people constantly bitch about their government (and indeed their country).
That would imply that bitching about the governement is unpatriotic. I believe quite the opposite. I'll agree with you that Americans extoll some of the most blind, absurd and at time hypocritical patriotism, but we definately don't have a monopoly on nationalism.
This would be insightful, were it not for the fact that almost every person I've met, no matter where they are from, believes that their country is the best.
I think it's hard for non-Jewish and non-Hindus (like me) to understand the idea of purity and sanctity in the same way that these two faiths do. Especially Christians in the US, where many would print their book on toilet paper if they thought it would be read first. Aside from keeping the text accurate, in order to be practiced properly, nothing of religious use should be said to be "spoiled"--even the person, hence the rules regarding which foods and materials are clean and unclean. Of course the strictness of this varies, but its an extra facet that you will not see in many other faiths.
Does this mean I should salute our third-world neighbors to the north?
Does this mean that I'll be able to get a fully-supported Linux laptop simply by smuggling it across the Ambassador bridge?
Department of Homeland Security eat my shorts! Three cheers for Canada!
Eh...oh yeah, and those guys who made Lord of the Rings...I bet they did it on an iMac.