Look at the patent is question. It's an idea, not an implementation. I don't imagine Motorola copied Apple's code to implement it. This is the problem with software patents. Even if Motorola's implementation is vastly more efficient... still 'infringing'.
Most iPhone users don't know anything beyond what they are given (not do most users in general). They don't care that they're locked into a single browser engine or can't use widgets on their home screen either. Basing your business on controlling the ignorant is profitable, but fails as people learn that other options exist.
An ultra-low power x86 chip would make a great candidate for clustered servers for web apps, etc. Bummer it won't run the OS everyone uses for that sort of thing. I guess Intel has enough money.
Fragmentation and lack of choice? Sounds like a good platform decision to me. At least they get proprietary connectors and lock-in to a single software repository.
It's not necessarily irrational, or hatred for that matter. Although either of those are possible, it's more likely profitable. Between Microsoft, Apple, and FaceBook, I'm fairly sure there's no shortage of money for shill factories to bash Google. FaceBook was caught before, and I can't imagine that would stop such an honourable company from trying again. The other two are at least as likely to do the same.
If you want well-written, code with only the required amount of documentation, do code reviews. I actually usually end up getting my developers to remove documentation and re-write sections, or rename methods... documentation can actually be a 'code-smell'. There are time's when it's needed as well of course. I find the key though is code reviews. Not formal, big-production code reviews at the end of a release of fearure (those are fairly useless and way too late), but informal walk-throughs with another developer or two (a junior and a senior... great teaching/learning exercise) while a feature is being coded, or at commit time, if you haven't done it before that. It does amazing things for the code quality.
I'm not explaining well. Everything is hidden when the screen is locked. Unfortunately, notifications are also not displayed when the screen is not locked. You actually have to do something to see any notifications that might have occurred when you were not looking at the screen. For me, this nearly completely defeats the point of having notifications. I would like to see at a glance that I have an email, or a chat request, etc.
You don't see the notifications at all (other than a toaster style warning the moment it happens). You have to 'ask' for them to be shown by putting the mouse in the bottom right corner of the screen. They hide them while the screen is *not* locked.
Oh I'm not commenting on the 'innovation', I'm commenting on the potential for what I consider evil behaviour. I consider all software patents invalid. I don't ever recall seeing one where, if the problem at hand was given to a handful of programmers in the field, they'd come up with a solution, and generally the same solution. The way many seem to be worded though, it does not even need to be the same solution implementation to infringe... many software patents are effectively patenting all solutions to a problem.
I've been using it for about the last year (occasionally switching to Xfce or Unity when I feel like it), and I'm okay with most of it, happy with a few bits, and fairly excited by the changes. My main complain was *always* the ridiculous notification system. Who the hell thought it was a good idea to hide notifications? When I gen an email while the screen is off, or I'm not looking at it, I want to frikkin' see it. That's the whole point of a notification system. Having to actually see if I have any notifications is only minimally better than having none at all.
Anyway... yeah, nice to hear. I'm pleased enough with the rest of it now than the extensions are available that it actually looks and works like I used to have Gnome 2 set up, other than the notifications mess.
I tried Unity again this week on a new development machine. I tolerated it right up until I added the extra monitors. Global menu is a very silly idea.
It's different in that this has been patented by a company with a vast collection of information about most people. Existing B&M stores may do this based on quick tells about a persons demeanor and appearance, but that's really all they have to go on. Using the data Google has to *help* people find deals, or preferred products... not Evil. Patenting a process to use the information available to them to determine maximum likely price... not necessarily Evil. Using said patent against the people whose data they have.. quite Evil, in my generally less than completely informed opinion.
It doesn't look promising, but at least if they do start using it now, people will likely be keeping an eye out for this sort of 'price adjustment'.
You generally want to swap storage cards because you're not near a computer, or at least I find that the most common scenario. Android handles this quite nicely... it seems this phone does it just to say they have it... it's not particularly useful as implemented though.
Two years? Right, like those people with access to this information won't make copies of something useful. ISP data should be treated the same as phone conversations and mail. Why the hell aren't they?
I've been thinking about this whole 'a corporation is a person' concept. Can it be used against them? Isn't one company owning another slavery? Buying out a company and selling off its assets murder and dismemberment?
Slashdot Mirror
You can also replicate it quite closely with the Android interface is you like. Having configuration options is wonderful.
Look at the patent is question. It's an idea, not an implementation. I don't imagine Motorola copied Apple's code to implement it. This is the problem with software patents. Even if Motorola's implementation is vastly more efficient ... still 'infringing'.
Well, Apple did do that in the US, so it's not out of the question.
Overestimating the intelligence of the public, something Apple, and most other American companies learned not to do a very long time ago.
Most iPhone users don't know anything beyond what they are given (not do most users in general). They don't care that they're locked into a single browser engine or can't use widgets on their home screen either. Basing your business on controlling the ignorant is profitable, but fails as people learn that other options exist.
An ultra-low power x86 chip would make a great candidate for clustered servers for web apps, etc. Bummer it won't run the OS everyone uses for that sort of thing. I guess Intel has enough money.
Fragmentation and lack of choice? Sounds like a good platform decision to me. At least they get proprietary connectors and lock-in to a single software repository.
It's not necessarily irrational, or hatred for that matter. Although either of those are possible, it's more likely profitable. Between Microsoft, Apple, and FaceBook, I'm fairly sure there's no shortage of money for shill factories to bash Google. FaceBook was caught before, and I can't imagine that would stop such an honourable company from trying again. The other two are at least as likely to do the same.
I would guess that they want more reason to track you and intercept and record all of your communications.
You can bet the person in charge of purchasing those has a couple of 'demo' macbooks and ipads at home.
So basically, he's holding it wrong.
Let's hope it doesn't become an instruction manual like 1984.
Impressive. Sad that you have to show the people actually getting paid for this how it's done.
If you want well-written, code with only the required amount of documentation, do code reviews. I actually usually end up getting my developers to remove documentation and re-write sections, or rename methods ... documentation can actually be a 'code-smell'. There are time's when it's needed as well of course. I find the key though is code reviews. Not formal, big-production code reviews at the end of a release of fearure (those are fairly useless and way too late), but informal walk-throughs with another developer or two (a junior and a senior ... great teaching/learning exercise) while a feature is being coded, or at commit time, if you haven't done it before that. It does amazing things for the code quality.
I'm not explaining well. Everything is hidden when the screen is locked. Unfortunately, notifications are also not displayed when the screen is not locked. You actually have to do something to see any notifications that might have occurred when you were not looking at the screen. For me, this nearly completely defeats the point of having notifications. I would like to see at a glance that I have an email, or a chat request, etc.
You don't see the notifications at all (other than a toaster style warning the moment it happens). You have to 'ask' for them to be shown by putting the mouse in the bottom right corner of the screen. They hide them while the screen is *not* locked.
Oh I'm not commenting on the 'innovation', I'm commenting on the potential for what I consider evil behaviour. I consider all software patents invalid. I don't ever recall seeing one where, if the problem at hand was given to a handful of programmers in the field, they'd come up with a solution, and generally the same solution. The way many seem to be worded though, it does not even need to be the same solution implementation to infringe ... many software patents are effectively patenting all solutions to a problem.
I've been using it for about the last year (occasionally switching to Xfce or Unity when I feel like it), and I'm okay with most of it, happy with a few bits, and fairly excited by the changes. My main complain was *always* the ridiculous notification system. Who the hell thought it was a good idea to hide notifications? When I gen an email while the screen is off, or I'm not looking at it, I want to frikkin' see it. That's the whole point of a notification system. Having to actually see if I have any notifications is only minimally better than having none at all.
Anyway ... yeah, nice to hear. I'm pleased enough with the rest of it now than the extensions are available that it actually looks and works like I used to have Gnome 2 set up, other than the notifications mess.
I tried Unity again this week on a new development machine. I tolerated it right up until I added the extra monitors. Global menu is a very silly idea.
It's different in that this has been patented by a company with a vast collection of information about most people. Existing B&M stores may do this based on quick tells about a persons demeanor and appearance, but that's really all they have to go on. Using the data Google has to *help* people find deals, or preferred products ... not Evil. Patenting a process to use the information available to them to determine maximum likely price ... not necessarily Evil. Using said patent against the people whose data they have .. quite Evil, in my generally less than completely informed opinion.
It doesn't look promising, but at least if they do start using it now, people will likely be keeping an eye out for this sort of 'price adjustment'.
You generally want to swap storage cards because you're not near a computer, or at least I find that the most common scenario. Android handles this quite nicely ... it seems this phone does it just to say they have it ... it's not particularly useful as implemented though.
Are you serious? Why the hell would anyone design a system like that?
So basically, Windows is the right tool for things that only run on Windows ... otherwise, use Linux.
Copyright cartels? I had assumed they were backing most of these pushed for data retention.
Two years? Right, like those people with access to this information won't make copies of something useful. ISP data should be treated the same as phone conversations and mail. Why the hell aren't they?
I've been thinking about this whole 'a corporation is a person' concept. Can it be used against them? Isn't one company owning another slavery? Buying out a company and selling off its assets murder and dismemberment?