This article is dumb. Palm is working hard on getting everything in line and many policies have evolved. They have ALREADY said they're working with the developer and that it's okay that the source is available.
The App Catalog is still in beta so the latest terms, etc are not there. I don't even know why Slashdot accepted this article as it was already debunked and addressed by Palm.
This is just stupid. The excuse for delivering content based on a region (or using specific servers for that region) is dumb.
All they have to do is run a quick check on the current IP address and it'll tell them what region you're in (spoofing need not apply). No need to hard code any of this shit.
Is Nintendo _that_ incompetant or are they trying to rip everyone off?
"Also, Adobe has to have a 64 bit version for Windows, because Windows comes in 64- and 32- bit versions, but OS X has the same support for both 64- and 32- bit in the same OS..."
That makes no sense. Microsoft's 64-bit OS is just like Leopard in that it can work with 32-bit and 64-bit on the same OS.
Adobe doesn't have to do this as Adobe Photoshop CS3 runs just fine under 64-bit.
This does, however, prove that the Photoshop project manager (or whoever it was from Adobe) was full of shit saying they weren't going to move to 64-bit because their code is so optimized that any benefits of moving to 64-bit are neglegable.
It's not Apple's stuff. It's Darwin. Darwin is a UNIX variant that is open source and Apple uses it as the foundation for OS X. Since the code is open sourced Apple has to legally share its source code for those specific components (such as DTrace).
This is wrong. It was confirmed a year ago that Microsoft makes money on each console. I don't have the exact figures, but they are making money on their hardware as well as license fees.
My Mac Mini came with 512MB and it was very slow. It constantly trashed the disk. I had the same issue with an eMac I had to use when I worked for Apple. Even though it had 768MB of ram, after opening a few apps it became extremely slow and used all the memory.
I'm not really sure why people say Vista is bloated... not only did they remove quite a bit of legacy code from it but it can run very well at 512MB. I added 2GB to my Mac Mini and it runs quick now but I typically have about 600-700MB free even with almost nothing open which is less than my Vista machine even after it caches several apps.
You have got to be kidding me. This is just Blu-Ray and HD-DVD content. I cannot tell you how much HD content I've watched on my computer perfectly fine.
You're spreading FUD. For someone who is suggesting that I search Google regarding the DRM systems in Vista, you really should have done the same.
First off, who cares if WMP does not allow you to back-up your licenses? Now it works exactly like iTunes in that it requires you to retrieve the rights from the company you purchased the song from. I didn't hear anyone complaining when Apple did this, why complain about MS? Besides, Microsoft has lost Urge and will be combining the Zune store into WMP which will include over a million songs DRM free.
Secondly, the HD DRM applies to ONLY Blu-Ray and HD-DVD and if OS X or Linux wants to play these movies, they also _HAVE_ to incorporate it so it's not Microsoft's fault. You can watch whatever else HD-DVD content you want without issue. The issues with CableCards is more of Patents and IP and you'll see the exact same problems when/if they start working in OS X and Linux.
Your statement makes absolutely no sense. The ONLY DRM system that has been added to Vista is required by all operating systems (this includes OS X and Linux) if they want to display Blu-Ray and HD-DVD content in high definition.
Vista is actually a very large step forward for Windows. The UI is now driven by the graphics card, the drivers are now in the user space (where they belong), the kernel and many core components of the OS has been re-written to remove legacy code and to improve updating. Microsoft has done a lot to "fix" the issues with Windows.
Well, EDGE and EV-DO are more than capable of downloading large files quickly but... why is your website heavy in regards to file size in the first place? The layout of your website should NEVER be heavy (even highly complex layouts can be done without going above 100KB even with lots of graphics) so this isn't an issue. If you're using large images for products (which should be the only items that take up more than 30KB per image), then why would you want it smaller anyway? I would rather the full version especially since if I'm loading it that means I want to look at it.
It seems everyone is missing the big picture. Relying on User Agent strings for ANYTHING is like adding concrete to a bridge that's falling apart. If you don't fix it and fix it the correct way, you're going to have tons of patches and eventually the whole thing is going to just fall. The services that make file sizes smaller are also quick fixes that don't really resolve anything and just allows web developers to become more sloppy.
I've been building web sites for over 10 years now and there is no reason you can't have a really complex and graphical website the size of Slashdot or CNN and have the entire page be under 100-150kb. Compression and file formats have come a long way and knowing when to use which one is key.
Vodafone, as well as all web developers relying on the User Agent string are taking the wrong approach to this.
There is a reason we can specify mobile for a style sheet. First, your website shouldn't be heavy on HTML and should be able to degrade nicely. Secondly, you use the mobile style sheet to tell the mobile browser how to render everything.
It's dumb to rely on the user agent string for ANYTHING and completely ignore standards designed to help with this.
I agree. The runner-up has a much more modern looking design and looks better than the winner's design. It also sticks with the same layout as the original Slashdot where as the winner has re-positioned login elements.
It's unfortunate the users of Slashdot didn't get a chance to vote
I honestly think HD DVD will win over Blu-Ray. While name recognition will help, it won't be the deciding factor.
Remember, many don't have much faith in Sony anymore. They've had numerous delays with their PS3, which is their main way to market Blu-Ray. The PS3 is expected to be $599 or possibly more. Not only that, but their last format, UMD, failed miserably and is being pulled off Wal-Mart's shelves. Combine that with their previous failures with formats like Mini-Disc and Sony doesn't have much of a track record with having successful mediums. Also, don't forget, many consumers have a bad taste in their mouth because of Sony installing rootkits on their computers even if they disaggred to their EULA.
Other things that will help HD DVD is the fact that it has at least a 3 month lead on Blu-Ray. That and right now, you can buy an HD DVD player for $499 where as most Blu-Ray players are expected to cost around $1,000 when they're released.
Also, when customers find out that many Blu-Ray players will include a feature to disable themselves remotely if anything "odd" has been detected in the player (I'm sure this will also be exploited by hackers). This permenantly damages the palyer requiring chips to be replaced.
Honestly, I think Blu-Ray is great for doing huge backups and working with large files on computers, but I can't see it succeeding in the movie market.
Oh I know that technique is bad and I'm definately not defending it. However, there are plenty of large websites that still use this method of spacing. It sounds like this addition to the browser would break many of those sites.
This is going to be a nightmare for web developers like me. Not only will I have to test my website in Internet Explorer 5, 6, 7, Opera 6, 7, 8, Firefox 1, 1.5, 2, Konquerer/Safari, Netscape, etc... but also test in the SAME browsers on monitors with a high resolution to make sure the High DPI rendering doesn't mess up navigation.
This is just a bad idea. Not only is this not going through the W3C as it should to be standardized, but many sites do pixel positioning to have ultimate control over their design. This could throw that out of wack (it looks like this only affects CSS and not pictures/spacers some developers use). Also, I can guarentee you if this is standardized, it'll be like Microsoft's Alpha-Transparent PNG support... it'll come... eventually...
Fixing a patch that either simply removes this log file or encrypts the password in it is very simple. I could do this in a few minutes tops.
Microsoft's security issues often are the result of an issue that requires code re-writes and changes. It takes time to do that, compile it, and test it. There is a huge difference between this tiny flaw and a buffer overflow in Windows Media Player.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes. What a surprise...
This article is dumb. Palm is working hard on getting everything in line and many policies have evolved. They have ALREADY said they're working with the developer and that it's okay that the source is available.
The App Catalog is still in beta so the latest terms, etc are not there. I don't even know why Slashdot accepted this article as it was already debunked and addressed by Palm.
This is just stupid. The excuse for delivering content based on a region (or using specific servers for that region) is dumb. All they have to do is run a quick check on the current IP address and it'll tell them what region you're in (spoofing need not apply). No need to hard code any of this shit. Is Nintendo _that_ incompetant or are they trying to rip everyone off?
Java is slow and bloated. Mono, while a great effort, is awkward and not 100%. Go with wxWidgets.
"Also, Adobe has to have a 64 bit version for Windows, because Windows comes in 64- and 32- bit versions, but OS X has the same support for both 64- and 32- bit in the same OS..."
That makes no sense. Microsoft's 64-bit OS is just like Leopard in that it can work with 32-bit and 64-bit on the same OS.
Adobe doesn't have to do this as Adobe Photoshop CS3 runs just fine under 64-bit.
This does, however, prove that the Photoshop project manager (or whoever it was from Adobe) was full of shit saying they weren't going to move to 64-bit because their code is so optimized that any benefits of moving to 64-bit are neglegable.
It's not Apple's stuff. It's Darwin. Darwin is a UNIX variant that is open source and Apple uses it as the foundation for OS X. Since the code is open sourced Apple has to legally share its source code for those specific components (such as DTrace).
Use a class, man!
I don't know why.... but this cracked me up. heh
If you read the blog posting, you would know that the html and xml files are for testing purposes
This is wrong. It was confirmed a year ago that Microsoft makes money on each console. I don't have the exact figures, but they are making money on their hardware as well as license fees.
My Mac Mini came with 512MB and it was very slow. It constantly trashed the disk. I had the same issue with an eMac I had to use when I worked for Apple. Even though it had 768MB of ram, after opening a few apps it became extremely slow and used all the memory. I'm not really sure why people say Vista is bloated... not only did they remove quite a bit of legacy code from it but it can run very well at 512MB. I added 2GB to my Mac Mini and it runs quick now but I typically have about 600-700MB free even with almost nothing open which is less than my Vista machine even after it caches several apps.
You have got to be kidding me. This is just Blu-Ray and HD-DVD content. I cannot tell you how much HD content I've watched on my computer perfectly fine.
You're spreading FUD. For someone who is suggesting that I search Google regarding the DRM systems in Vista, you really should have done the same.
First off, who cares if WMP does not allow you to back-up your licenses? Now it works exactly like iTunes in that it requires you to retrieve the rights from the company you purchased the song from. I didn't hear anyone complaining when Apple did this, why complain about MS? Besides, Microsoft has lost Urge and will be combining the Zune store into WMP which will include over a million songs DRM free.
Secondly, the HD DRM applies to ONLY Blu-Ray and HD-DVD and if OS X or Linux wants to play these movies, they also _HAVE_ to incorporate it so it's not Microsoft's fault. You can watch whatever else HD-DVD content you want without issue. The issues with CableCards is more of Patents and IP and you'll see the exact same problems when/if they start working in OS X and Linux.
WGA is included on XP as well... again, not only a Vista issue
Your statement makes absolutely no sense. The ONLY DRM system that has been added to Vista is required by all operating systems (this includes OS X and Linux) if they want to display Blu-Ray and HD-DVD content in high definition.
Vista is actually a very large step forward for Windows. The UI is now driven by the graphics card, the drivers are now in the user space (where they belong), the kernel and many core components of the OS has been re-written to remove legacy code and to improve updating. Microsoft has done a lot to "fix" the issues with Windows.
Your statement is complete FUD
Well, EDGE and EV-DO are more than capable of downloading large files quickly but... why is your website heavy in regards to file size in the first place? The layout of your website should NEVER be heavy (even highly complex layouts can be done without going above 100KB even with lots of graphics) so this isn't an issue.
If you're using large images for products (which should be the only items that take up more than 30KB per image), then why would you want it smaller anyway? I would rather the full version especially since if I'm loading it that means I want to look at it.
It seems everyone is missing the big picture. Relying on User Agent strings for ANYTHING is like adding concrete to a bridge that's falling apart. If you don't fix it and fix it the correct way, you're going to have tons of patches and eventually the whole thing is going to just fall. The services that make file sizes smaller are also quick fixes that don't really resolve anything and just allows web developers to become more sloppy.
I've been building web sites for over 10 years now and there is no reason you can't have a really complex and graphical website the size of Slashdot or CNN and have the entire page be under 100-150kb. Compression and file formats have come a long way and knowing when to use which one is key.
Vodafone, as well as all web developers relying on the User Agent string are taking the wrong approach to this. There is a reason we can specify mobile for a style sheet. First, your website shouldn't be heavy on HTML and should be able to degrade nicely. Secondly, you use the mobile style sheet to tell the mobile browser how to render everything. It's dumb to rely on the user agent string for ANYTHING and completely ignore standards designed to help with this.
They're extending the 1-year warranty to 3 years. The 90 day warranty was changed to 1 year a long time ago
I agree. The runner-up has a much more modern looking design and looks better than the winner's design. It also sticks with the same layout as the original Slashdot where as the winner has re-positioned login elements.
It's unfortunate the users of Slashdot didn't get a chance to vote
I honestly think HD DVD will win over Blu-Ray. While name recognition will help, it won't be the deciding factor.
Remember, many don't have much faith in Sony anymore. They've had numerous delays with their PS3, which is their main way to market Blu-Ray. The PS3 is expected to be $599 or possibly more. Not only that, but their last format, UMD, failed miserably and is being pulled off Wal-Mart's shelves. Combine that with their previous failures with formats like Mini-Disc and Sony doesn't have much of a track record with having successful mediums. Also, don't forget, many consumers have a bad taste in their mouth because of Sony installing rootkits on their computers even if they disaggred to their EULA.
Other things that will help HD DVD is the fact that it has at least a 3 month lead on Blu-Ray. That and right now, you can buy an HD DVD player for $499 where as most Blu-Ray players are expected to cost around $1,000 when they're released.
Also, when customers find out that many Blu-Ray players will include a feature to disable themselves remotely if anything "odd" has been detected in the player (I'm sure this will also be exploited by hackers). This permenantly damages the palyer requiring chips to be replaced.
Honestly, I think Blu-Ray is great for doing huge backups and working with large files on computers, but I can't see it succeeding in the movie market.
Oh I know that technique is bad and I'm definately not defending it. However, there are plenty of large websites that still use this method of spacing. It sounds like this addition to the browser would break many of those sites.
This is going to be a nightmare for web developers like me. Not only will I have to test my website in Internet Explorer 5, 6, 7, Opera 6, 7, 8, Firefox 1, 1.5, 2, Konquerer/Safari, Netscape, etc... but also test in the SAME browsers on monitors with a high resolution to make sure the High DPI rendering doesn't mess up navigation.
This is just a bad idea. Not only is this not going through the W3C as it should to be standardized, but many sites do pixel positioning to have ultimate control over their design. This could throw that out of wack (it looks like this only affects CSS and not pictures/spacers some developers use). Also, I can guarentee you if this is standardized, it'll be like Microsoft's Alpha-Transparent PNG support... it'll come... eventually...
Are you retarded? They added a feature so you can limit the volume. You DON'T HAVE TO.
Seriously, do you people even know how to read?
I posted this article about 3-4 weeks ago on Slashdot with the SAME information and it got rejected but this one goes through? RIDICULOUS!
I feel cheated now.
Fixing a patch that either simply removes this log file or encrypts the password in it is very simple. I could do this in a few minutes tops.
Microsoft's security issues often are the result of an issue that requires code re-writes and changes. It takes time to do that, compile it, and test it. There is a huge difference between this tiny flaw and a buffer overflow in Windows Media Player.