Perhaps it's time for the SEC to start being tougher, so we can avoid more dishonest dealings (lies) coming from corporations & avoid yet another collapse.
Yes, but why start here, of all places? It's completely bizarre.
No, Microsoft copied Apple. Once Apple was done with Xerox's ideas, it was very different to what Xerox had, much more refined. That's what Microsoft copied, they didn't go to the original Xerox work and refine it themselves, they just copied Apple's OS.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
I think you mangled that saying a bit. It should be "Fool me twice... I won't get fooled again." Does this have something to do with Obama being in office?
Because if no one releases programs which play broken DRMed files, then people will eventually stop releasing broken DRMed files.
Hang on, the discussion was about Microsoft removing DRM support from Windows, not every developer manufacturer deciding to drop DRM. If Microsoft removes DRM from Windows, then some other developer will simply come along and produce playback software for DRMed files.
If you're going to argue that there's a greater utility to opening the box and using the new product, then you are admitting that the unopened box is worth more.
Well, if you read the article, the author clearly gained enjoyment from opening the box:
"It's incredibly satisfying to open up product packaging sealed some 25 years before. Like bubbles of atmospheric gas encased in Cretaceous amber, there's authentic 1984 Atari factory air trapped inside every box. They say that if you twist your nose just right during a full moon, you can even smell a hint of Nolan Bushnell's Old Spice."
It's also possible that the author made more money by writing and publishing his experience, than would have been gained by reselling.
or the mass of people that Obama has mobilized into believing that something will be vastly different with him in charge.
I think it's not so much belief about Obama being in charge, more a sense that people themselves can be different without the oppressive hate machine in charge. It certainly seems that public political discourse is on the rise after so many years in the dark.
There will never be a year of Linux, but it doesn't matter, what matters is that there is never a 'the last year of Linux or 'the Final year of Linux'.
Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that there will always be a year of Linux, but never the year of Linux?
No, it's not, because hard disks sizes have NOT been around since before than the most common operating systems and software environments (such as DOS etc. popping up and calculating disk size divided by 1024)
Wrong. Hard disks have been around for a lot longer than DOS. And they used decimal multipliers to measure capacity way back then.
When your disk is "200GB" and every OS written before 2 years ago says "195GB", and this cannot be put down to the old adage of "well, formatted capacity is less than disk capacity" bullshit excuse (not even the worst filesystem ever would drop that much of of the disk space) or anything else but boldfaced cheek.
Who is putting it down to "formatted capacity? Everybody understands that it is because of the two different systems of units. So, where's the cheek in using units correctly?
Of course your view of it is entirely revisionist, in that somehow a special new naming methodology that hadn't been standardized is NOW used which exonerates them for all the mislabeling in the past.
But there was never any mislabeling in the past. You are the one playing revisionist. It has always been the binary system of units that was the odd one out. It is ONLY used in programming and measuring computer memory. It was never a standard. Everywhere else in the science/engineering universe, "mega" means "1 million" and "kilo" means "1 thousand. It was the programmers who screwed it up by being lazy with terminology, not the hard drive manufacturers.
Hard disk manufacturers were expected to specify the disk size in terms of how you will see this size in the applications you're meant to use it, if they are marketing to people who are using these applications.
Say what? I expect them to make storage devices. They accurately specified the size of those storage devices, so I don't see what was done wrong. The hard drive manufacturers don't control the OS developers, so how is it their fault that their product was being misrepresented by software?
It makes no sense to measure hard drives in binary units.
but the hard disk manufacturers were sued, and settled exactly because they could not hide behind "engineering" to explain why the advertised values differed, and they could not explain WHY they did not clarify it on the packaging or specification sheets of the products.
Oh, bullshit. One manufacturer settled without admitting wrongdoing. It's often easier and cheaper to settle a lawsuit than to argue it. And it's not about hiding anything. It's about the lack of technical competence in most court rooms. It's highly unlikely that they'd get a fair trial, as most courts wouldn't understand the technical issues and subtleties.
They just kept the biggest number and got caught out. Hence, big fat lie.
Again, what do you mean, "caught out"? They were caught doing something which they'd been doing for decades, which was never a secret, and never intended to mislead?
You are accusing people of lying, and you have no evidence whatsoever. Is that something you normally do? It's pretty disgusting. Nowhere in your rants have you provided one shred of evidence. You are just spinning a story that matches your pre-made conclusion.
Look anywhere, and you'll see that a byte being 1024 bits has never been "standard", and until recently it has not been standard practice to clarify the meaning in boilerplate text. The situation has been a mess for a long time, and to simplistically blame it all on hard drive manufacturers is absurd. Especially as, if anybody started this mess, it was programmers abusing the SI prefixes in ways they never had been in any other field. The hard drive manufacturers were at least sticking with a more logical and consistent system.
Why should you have to pay 99 dollars to run an app that you wrote on your own phone?
Because if that is what the license requires, then you pay it, or don't buy it. Why do you think you are automatically entitled to the free use of software that anybody writes? It's Apple's property, you don't have to use it.
In any case, as noted elsewhere, you don't need to pay to write your own app, you pay to distribute it to others.
Given that there is a greater than 90% chance that a person wanting to jump into Windows Mobile development will already have a machine capable of doing the development, and a less than 10% chance that a person wanting to jump into iPhone development will already have a Mac capable of doing the development means that the OP has a very valid point.
Sorry, you're not being logical here. I very much doubt that those specific groups of developers have computer ownership patterns that match the general population's. Also, buying a new computer is a very different sort of "barrier" to a developer than the general populace - the kind of barrier that might be called an "incentive" or an "excuse".
Slashdot Mirror
Why? How do you know he didn't have a hormone imbalance?
I'm afraid to say that as an Apple fanboy I'd rather him do that than die.
Couldn't a fanboy just donate their own liver to Jobs?
Perhaps it's time for the SEC to start being tougher, so we can avoid more dishonest dealings (lies) coming from corporations & avoid yet another collapse.
Yes, but why start here, of all places? It's completely bizarre.
He had a RELAPSE OF CANCER - which required MORE CHEMO
Wait - where are you getting this from? There have been no announcements of a cancer relapse, and he hasn't had any chemotherapy that I'm aware of.
Problem is they lied and denied his condition.
Where is the evidence of that? I know there's been plenty of uninformed speculation, but I've not seen any hard evidence.
No, Microsoft copied Apple. Once Apple was done with Xerox's ideas, it was very different to what Xerox had, much more refined. That's what Microsoft copied, they didn't go to the original Xerox work and refine it themselves, they just copied Apple's OS.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
I think you mangled that saying a bit. It should be "Fool me twice... I won't get fooled again." Does this have something to do with Obama being in office?
Because if no one releases programs which play broken DRMed files, then people will eventually stop releasing broken DRMed files.
Hang on, the discussion was about Microsoft removing DRM support from Windows, not every developer manufacturer deciding to drop DRM. If Microsoft removes DRM from Windows, then some other developer will simply come along and produce playback software for DRMed files.
Normally I just threw in whatever random responses I knew would put it over 18 and then moved forward.
... and then backward, and then forward again...
There are DTV tuners on USB sticks that are likely easier to hack than some single-purpose hardware like these converter boxes!
I have one of those DTV tuners on a USB stick. Where do I plug the TV into it? How can you "send your own MPEG stream and have it displayed" with it?
AC|DC
AC pipe DC? OK, but I hope your transformer is up to it.
I looked at the first page and then came back to slashdot.
Why leave in the first place?
If you're going to argue that there's a greater utility to opening the box and using the new product, then you are admitting that the unopened box is worth more.
Well, if you read the article, the author clearly gained enjoyment from opening the box:
"It's incredibly satisfying to open up product packaging sealed some 25 years before. Like bubbles of atmospheric gas encased in Cretaceous amber, there's authentic 1984 Atari factory air trapped inside every box. They say that if you twist your nose just right during a full moon, you can even smell a hint of Nolan Bushnell's Old Spice."
It's also possible that the author made more money by writing and publishing his experience, than would have been gained by reselling.
You mean Joseph Hitler, the plumber? Sure, he's a nice guy, but I wouldn't say he exudes charisma. Not with that butt crack showing, anyway.
or the mass of people that Obama has mobilized into believing that something will be vastly different with him in charge.
I think it's not so much belief about Obama being in charge, more a sense that people themselves can be different without the oppressive hate machine in charge. It certainly seems that public political discourse is on the rise after so many years in the dark.
And we have dark fiber...60000 users trying to stream at their desks is a bad thing.
Network racist!
Or perhaps the Bush staffers just can't spell correctly?
There will never be a year of Linux, but it doesn't matter, what matters is that there is never a 'the last year of Linux or 'the Final year of Linux'.
Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that there will always be a year of Linux, but never the year of Linux?
No, it's not, because hard disks sizes have NOT been around since before than the most common operating systems and software environments (such as DOS etc. popping up and calculating disk size divided by 1024)
Wrong. Hard disks have been around for a lot longer than DOS. And they used decimal multipliers to measure capacity way back then.
When your disk is "200GB" and every OS written before 2 years ago says "195GB", and this cannot be put down to the old adage of "well, formatted capacity is less than disk capacity" bullshit excuse (not even the worst filesystem ever would drop that much of of the disk space) or anything else but boldfaced cheek.
Who is putting it down to "formatted capacity? Everybody understands that it is because of the two different systems of units. So, where's the cheek in using units correctly?
Of course your view of it is entirely revisionist, in that somehow a special new naming methodology that hadn't been standardized is NOW used which exonerates them for all the mislabeling in the past.
But there was never any mislabeling in the past. You are the one playing revisionist. It has always been the binary system of units that was the odd one out. It is ONLY used in programming and measuring computer memory. It was never a standard. Everywhere else in the science/engineering universe, "mega" means "1 million" and "kilo" means "1 thousand. It was the programmers who screwed it up by being lazy with terminology, not the hard drive manufacturers.
Hard disk manufacturers were expected to specify the disk size in terms of how you will see this size in the applications you're meant to use it, if they are marketing to people who are using these applications.
Say what? I expect them to make storage devices. They accurately specified the size of those storage devices, so I don't see what was done wrong. The hard drive manufacturers don't control the OS developers, so how is it their fault that their product was being misrepresented by software?
It makes no sense to measure hard drives in binary units.
but the hard disk manufacturers were sued, and settled exactly because they could not hide behind "engineering" to explain why the advertised values differed, and they could not explain WHY they did not clarify it on the packaging or specification sheets of the products.
Oh, bullshit. One manufacturer settled without admitting wrongdoing. It's often easier and cheaper to settle a lawsuit than to argue it. And it's not about hiding anything. It's about the lack of technical competence in most court rooms. It's highly unlikely that they'd get a fair trial, as most courts wouldn't understand the technical issues and subtleties.
They just kept the biggest number and got caught out. Hence, big fat lie.
Again, what do you mean, "caught out"? They were caught doing something which they'd been doing for decades, which was never a secret, and never intended to mislead?
You are accusing people of lying, and you have no evidence whatsoever. Is that something you normally do? It's pretty disgusting. Nowhere in your rants have you provided one shred of evidence. You are just spinning a story that matches your pre-made conclusion.
Look anywhere, and you'll see that a byte being 1024 bits has never been "standard", and until recently it has not been standard practice to clarify the meaning in boilerplate text. The situation has been a mess for a long time, and to simplistically blame it all on hard drive manufacturers is absurd. Especially as, if anybody started this mess, it was programmers abusing the SI prefixes in ways they never had been in any other field. The hard drive manufacturers were at least sticking with a more logical and consistent system.
Some more sanity on this topic.
Why should you have to pay 99 dollars to run an app that you wrote on your own phone?
Because if that is what the license requires, then you pay it, or don't buy it. Why do you think you are automatically entitled to the free use of software that anybody writes? It's Apple's property, you don't have to use it.
In any case, as noted elsewhere, you don't need to pay to write your own app, you pay to distribute it to others.
Oh noes! Something costs $99... the horror! You may want to look up something called "capitalism".
Given that there is a greater than 90% chance that a person wanting to jump into Windows Mobile development will already have a machine capable of doing the development, and a less than 10% chance that a person wanting to jump into iPhone development will already have a Mac capable of doing the development means that the OP has a very valid point.
Sorry, you're not being logical here. I very much doubt that those specific groups of developers have computer ownership patterns that match the general population's. Also, buying a new computer is a very different sort of "barrier" to a developer than the general populace - the kind of barrier that might be called an "incentive" or an "excuse".
Erm... I call it an iTouch. It's a good name
No. No, it absolutely is not.
(if it wasn't already in use I'm sure apple would have used it)
No. I'm absolutely sure they wouldn't have.
There are ways to circument [246tnt.com] the code-signing.
Apparently, there are also ways to circumvent the letter "v".
Shouldn't that e a Ranger, Wizard, Elf and Dwarf?
Well, when you have a LOTR license (to print money), it can be whatever you want it to be. It's just not that important.