Except that the only way that they are even going to be able to make the connection of Linux = Android is by way of the Internet. No one sells Android as Linux. The average Joe would only learn that Android is Linux-based from a technically-geared article or website, and it's also likely that said website would also refer to desktop Linux in comparison. Fuck, most Americans aren't even aware of Android - they see it, they use it, but they don't know it's called Android, or that it even has a name, and when they have a name for it, they always refer to the entire platform by the manufacturer-specific UI. Owners of Motorola DROID phones call the system DROID, in the same way people assume that the web is synonymous to, and also proprietary to, Internet Explorer.
TL;DR: No one except for a handful of retards will make that connection. No worries.
It's because the router is Verizon property and they probably have access to it no matter what your password is?
Actually, I've never used FiOS but I've always assumed that the routers remained property of Verizon, same as the set-top-boxes for television do. If someone can prove this, one way or another, I'd like to know.
P.S., on another note, has anyone tried to port a free router distro to the Westell 9100EM routers specially made for Verizon as FiOS routers and MoCA gateways. It seems Westell released the Linux-based firmware source which, although I've not looked at it, is probably the same Linux firmware that Verizon ships these things with, except without Verizon's branding and webapp look-n'-feel. I'm surprised that no-one has tried to port another Linux distro to it, but I guess that if Verizon owns the routers, the customers with the know-how won't bother trying.
No, because this IS NOT APPLE'S APP STORE and therefore you can push whatever apps written in whatever language you like.
I guess that you and the guy you replied to both missed the mark entirely. This is not Apple's App Store, the iPhone SDK EULA doesn't apply here. Do you get it now? Need I bludgeon you with a LART until you do?
And before someone else hops on and tries to correct me again (and be wrong again by trying so), we're talking about an appstore for jailbroken iPhones. Please, read every single printable ASCII character in a posted story, not just the ones that your spin-doctor mind wants to see so that you can push your faulty and incorrect "facts". Fuck, the name of the story is An iPhone App Store That Apple Doesn't Control. I guess your backwards mind reads that as "An iPhone App Store That Apple Controls.
As a developer, this is completely useful to you. Not stated is the words "including, but not limited to", words that anyone with so much as a sliver of common sense would know are implied, but you have obviously thrown common sense out the window. This new applications store would enable you to push applications that don't conform to the iPhone SDK EULA.
Opera could push Opera Mobile for iPhone (which is not the same as Opera Mini, as Opera Mini is a web proxy + web browser renderer in the cloud + quasi-renderer on the phone that renders the SVG-like output of the browser in the cloud, and Opera Mini doesn't include Presto. Opera Mobile does.)
This means that if your iPhone app is a pile of Perl scripts, you can push it. What iPhone SDK EULA? We don't know what C/C++/Objective-C limitation you're talking about, we'll list your app in our store! If you feel like writing an app for iPhone in C#, you can push it as a.NET exe in PE-COFF format, instead of having to compile it to native code. If you wanted to port Firefox Mobile and have it use it's own JavaScript engine, you can. You could even push a port of Chrome using V8.
Earth to AC: We never left the Middle Ages, the obviousness of the existence of "upper", "middle" and "lower" classes are an example of this; everything not the top 1% that constitutes the "upper" class is a proverbial slave, except the situation has been extremely skewed to make it neigh impossible to argue that it is slavery or serfdom, since people have a false sense and expression of freedom sufficient to mask any possible viewpoint other than "freedom". TL;DR: If you're not rich, you're a slave, no matter how free you think you are.
The major problem with your argument is that he is saying that C++, not C, is too complex. Next time, actually read the fucking article and learn to have pedantic levels of distinction. Your hinting of a "C, C++, it's all the same!" attitude is not pedantic enough to be worthy of a Slashdot UID.
It's all about what numbers will be on that piece of paper the power company mails you each month. This piece of paper is commonly called a "bill". The debate is over keeping old hardware even though it has a higher cost per unit of performance, vs. being energy efficient by using modern hardware. The majority of people here are all about cutting their electric bill as much as possible, whereas I believe in keeping old hardware useful, which, for me, it's like a spiritual connection (and the only thing that comes close to such for me as I am a fervent Atheist.)
On another note, In my area, my electric company bills at $0.10 per kW/h. A small form factor (SFF) desktop with a 200 watt power supply, assuming that the installed components are pulling all 200 watts, it would take five hours of nonstop running for me to be billed 10 cents. For the sake of simplicity, I'll just assume a 30-day month, and in such a month, there are 720 hours (24 * 30). at 10 cents per kW/h, and 0.2 kW/h rating of the machine, the machine costs $14.40 to run non-stop for a month. While it might be better to replace it with a netbook, or a laptop, the "desktop flexibility" of PCI slots and the plethora of add-on cards in existence make the extra electricity cost worth it. Yes, this paragraph doesn't answer your question, but it's meant to help you understand the debate a little better.
And if you need to access the exact same files over three computers, at the exact same time, what do you do? Copy the files over to the other two machines?
And anything short of the most efficient use of power is a waste? No, you're not a cretin, you're just anal-retentive.
It's a tricky sticking point for what people? "Unsupported" simply means that if you call tech support, they won't help you, and the majority of people don't call tech support.
If your 486 is swapping, your machine is poorly configured. My machine (as mentioned in the grandparent post to this one) has 64MB of RAM. It never swaps. Not all data processing requires the entire data set to be resident in RAM, and even if it did, then the swap penalty means you'll get even better results when you get back to modern hardware. GPU offloading does not make sense in most situations. And since you're trying to push the idea that anything old must go as it is inefficent, then why should I code SSE routines in assembler, when coding in assembler is even older and less efficient than the 486 - and yes, you can get SSE optimizations in medium and high level languages, but you must write your code precisely in a manner that the compiler you use will realize to optimize it with SSE. In fact, I'd say your performance arguments here are making assumptions as to what the code in question does without having so much as one clue to the reality of the situation. Scientific engineering, molecular dynamics, audio/video codecs, number crunching, etc. might do good with these types of optimization but that's a really small subset of all the code that's ever been written.
Your battlecry of "modern, modern, modern!" reminds me of someone's cry of "developers, developers, developers!". I wish I hadn't commented in this discussion, otherwise I would use my moderator points to mod you down for being like those idiots who declare your cell phone obsolete if you've had it for more than 120 days.
Thank you! I have an old 486 that runs NetBSD 5.0. There are spells that are months long that I don't power it up, but when I do, it's debuggerin' time! I use the extreme constraints to refactor code for performance. Just stretch your expectations for execution time by times 5. A C2D is 100 times faster than the Am486DX2, but I like to torture myself until whatever it is I was coding runs no slower than 5 times longer than it originally did on the C2D. This is actually reasonable given the "slow but safe" model for the original draft code - it leaves plenty of room for improvement, and a 20x speed increase is quite possible in many cases - first draft code is never the best. When I finally take my code back to the C2D box, it screams. Old machines might be energy hogs per unit of performance, but any good programmer can use one to tighten code down as long as the code can reasonably be made to run on the old iron. If not, try on slightly newer iron until it at least runs, and then code on whatever oldest hardware you can get your code to run on. Don't stop til it runs reasonably given the hardware it is on.
Sounds like an boilerplate attempt to squash a mere speculation as if it were actually true. I've heard of cases of falsified review data to push a faulty product to market. I was just speculating, but your defense seems to lead towards it.
And if you don't think that the whole free world should be free to peer-review the source, you're an idiot. Your company does not have the absolute best in the field. Period. Grow up, grow some ethics, get with the times, and open the source. And if a competitor steals your source, just make sure you GPL'd it ahead of time and then sue them for GPL violations to the point your company acquires theirs as part of the judgement.
Oh, so because a few employees within a company (and maybe a closely related partner) have looked over the source, it's "peer reviewed"? Peer review means that EVERYONE can examine the source, including people you have never met nor have even heard their names. It means that people you absolutely hate can review your source, not just a few of your employees that have no qualms about lying and saying it's all good just to keep their jobs.
In other words, your source code has had as much legitimate peer review as my dick has, and since I'm a Slashdotter, any claims of sexual activity on my part are instantly dubious by that simple fact alone.
If you think that 100 or so odd lines of code can cover every single scenario and manage your heart in every possible conceivable case, you deserve the effects of a situation those 100 or so odd lines of code aren't prepared for.
If that situation leaves you dead, all the better, stupidity should be a capital offense anyways.
And yet the alternative Windows shell is still the same crappy cmd.exe we had back in the days of 2000. Tab completion was always there, the only difference now is that someone flipped a single binary bit in the registry's default settings to turn it on by default.
Desiring less bloat isn't being stuck in the past. Some of those features you describe, I'll probably never use, yet the code that drives them is always consuming RAM in my system, whether I want them too or not, something that with XP, where they don't exist, doesn't happen! (Those features consuming RAM in XP don't happen, I mean, for those too stupid to understand English.)
Slashdot Mirror
Except that the only way that they are even going to be able to make the connection of Linux = Android is by way of the Internet. No one sells Android as Linux. The average Joe would only learn that Android is Linux-based from a technically-geared article or website, and it's also likely that said website would also refer to desktop Linux in comparison. Fuck, most Americans aren't even aware of Android - they see it, they use it, but they don't know it's called Android, or that it even has a name, and when they have a name for it, they always refer to the entire platform by the manufacturer-specific UI. Owners of Motorola DROID phones call the system DROID, in the same way people assume that the web is synonymous to, and also proprietary to, Internet Explorer.
TL;DR: No one except for a handful of retards will make that connection. No worries.
This spam is the cancer that's killing Slashdot.
Drunk Bob No-Pants!
It's a hell of a lot better than not knowing.
It's because the router is Verizon property and they probably have access to it no matter what your password is?
Actually, I've never used FiOS but I've always assumed that the routers remained property of Verizon, same as the set-top-boxes for television do. If someone can prove this, one way or another, I'd like to know.
P.S., on another note, has anyone tried to port a free router distro to the Westell 9100EM routers specially made for Verizon as FiOS routers and MoCA gateways. It seems Westell released the Linux-based firmware source which, although I've not looked at it, is probably the same Linux firmware that Verizon ships these things with, except without Verizon's branding and webapp look-n'-feel. I'm surprised that no-one has tried to port another Linux distro to it, but I guess that if Verizon owns the routers, the customers with the know-how won't bother trying.
No, because this IS NOT APPLE'S APP STORE and therefore you can push whatever apps written in whatever language you like.
I guess that you and the guy you replied to both missed the mark entirely. This is not Apple's App Store, the iPhone SDK EULA doesn't apply here. Do you get it now? Need I bludgeon you with a LART until you do?
And before someone else hops on and tries to correct me again (and be wrong again by trying so), we're talking about an appstore for jailbroken iPhones. Please, read every single printable ASCII character in a posted story, not just the ones that your spin-doctor mind wants to see so that you can push your faulty and incorrect "facts". Fuck, the name of the story is An iPhone App Store That Apple Doesn't Control. I guess your backwards mind reads that as "An iPhone App Store That Apple Controls.
As a developer, this is completely useful to you. Not stated is the words "including, but not limited to", words that anyone with so much as a sliver of common sense would know are implied, but you have obviously thrown common sense out the window. This new applications store would enable you to push applications that don't conform to the iPhone SDK EULA.
Opera could push Opera Mobile for iPhone (which is not the same as Opera Mini, as Opera Mini is a web proxy + web browser renderer in the cloud + quasi-renderer on the phone that renders the SVG-like output of the browser in the cloud, and Opera Mini doesn't include Presto. Opera Mobile does.)
This means that if your iPhone app is a pile of Perl scripts, you can push it. What iPhone SDK EULA? We don't know what C/C++/Objective-C limitation you're talking about, we'll list your app in our store! If you feel like writing an app for iPhone in C#, you can push it as a .NET exe in PE-COFF format, instead of having to compile it to native code. If you wanted to port Firefox Mobile and have it use it's own JavaScript engine, you can. You could even push a port of Chrome using V8.
They bitch left and right about piracy yet they themselves are pirates.
Earth to AC: We never left the Middle Ages, the obviousness of the existence of "upper", "middle" and "lower" classes are an example of this; everything not the top 1% that constitutes the "upper" class is a proverbial slave, except the situation has been extremely skewed to make it neigh impossible to argue that it is slavery or serfdom, since people have a false sense and expression of freedom sufficient to mask any possible viewpoint other than "freedom". TL;DR: If you're not rich, you're a slave, no matter how free you think you are.
Finally, now I can finally free myself from the horror...
No! I can't do it, I need my Mafia Wars and FarmVille, I'm going to die!
The major problem with your argument is that he is saying that C++, not C, is too complex. Next time, actually read the fucking article and learn to have pedantic levels of distinction. Your hinting of a "C, C++, it's all the same!" attitude is not pedantic enough to be worthy of a Slashdot UID.
It's all about what numbers will be on that piece of paper the power company mails you each month. This piece of paper is commonly called a "bill". The debate is over keeping old hardware even though it has a higher cost per unit of performance, vs. being energy efficient by using modern hardware. The majority of people here are all about cutting their electric bill as much as possible, whereas I believe in keeping old hardware useful, which, for me, it's like a spiritual connection (and the only thing that comes close to such for me as I am a fervent Atheist.)
On another note, In my area, my electric company bills at $0.10 per kW/h. A small form factor (SFF) desktop with a 200 watt power supply, assuming that the installed components are pulling all 200 watts, it would take five hours of nonstop running for me to be billed 10 cents. For the sake of simplicity, I'll just assume a 30-day month, and in such a month, there are 720 hours (24 * 30). at 10 cents per kW/h, and 0.2 kW/h rating of the machine, the machine costs $14.40 to run non-stop for a month. While it might be better to replace it with a netbook, or a laptop, the "desktop flexibility" of PCI slots and the plethora of add-on cards in existence make the extra electricity cost worth it. Yes, this paragraph doesn't answer your question, but it's meant to help you understand the debate a little better.
And if you need to access the exact same files over three computers, at the exact same time, what do you do? Copy the files over to the other two machines?
And anything short of the most efficient use of power is a waste? No, you're not a cretin, you're just anal-retentive.
And what's the problem with being a liberal? Or is it a problem to be a trendy liberal?
It's a tricky sticking point for what people? "Unsupported" simply means that if you call tech support, they won't help you, and the majority of people don't call tech support.
If your 486 is swapping, your machine is poorly configured. My machine (as mentioned in the grandparent post to this one) has 64MB of RAM. It never swaps. Not all data processing requires the entire data set to be resident in RAM, and even if it did, then the swap penalty means you'll get even better results when you get back to modern hardware. GPU offloading does not make sense in most situations. And since you're trying to push the idea that anything old must go as it is inefficent, then why should I code SSE routines in assembler, when coding in assembler is even older and less efficient than the 486 - and yes, you can get SSE optimizations in medium and high level languages, but you must write your code precisely in a manner that the compiler you use will realize to optimize it with SSE. In fact, I'd say your performance arguments here are making assumptions as to what the code in question does without having so much as one clue to the reality of the situation. Scientific engineering, molecular dynamics, audio/video codecs, number crunching, etc. might do good with these types of optimization but that's a really small subset of all the code that's ever been written.
Your battlecry of "modern, modern, modern!" reminds me of someone's cry of "developers, developers, developers!". I wish I hadn't commented in this discussion, otherwise I would use my moderator points to mod you down for being like those idiots who declare your cell phone obsolete if you've had it for more than 120 days.
Thank you! I have an old 486 that runs NetBSD 5.0. There are spells that are months long that I don't power it up, but when I do, it's debuggerin' time! I use the extreme constraints to refactor code for performance. Just stretch your expectations for execution time by times 5. A C2D is 100 times faster than the Am486DX2, but I like to torture myself until whatever it is I was coding runs no slower than 5 times longer than it originally did on the C2D. This is actually reasonable given the "slow but safe" model for the original draft code - it leaves plenty of room for improvement, and a 20x speed increase is quite possible in many cases - first draft code is never the best. When I finally take my code back to the C2D box, it screams. Old machines might be energy hogs per unit of performance, but any good programmer can use one to tighten code down as long as the code can reasonably be made to run on the old iron. If not, try on slightly newer iron until it at least runs, and then code on whatever oldest hardware you can get your code to run on. Don't stop til it runs reasonably given the hardware it is on.
Why not install Mac OS X, then it'll be just like that box that sits NeXT to it. Mach kernel, bundles, and all.
Sounds like an boilerplate attempt to squash a mere speculation as if it were actually true. I've heard of cases of falsified review data to push a faulty product to market. I was just speculating, but your defense seems to lead towards it.
And if you don't think that the whole free world should be free to peer-review the source, you're an idiot. Your company does not have the absolute best in the field. Period. Grow up, grow some ethics, get with the times, and open the source. And if a competitor steals your source, just make sure you GPL'd it ahead of time and then sue them for GPL violations to the point your company acquires theirs as part of the judgement.
Linux is Linus's creation, he should have ultimate commit decision power
Except I'm a Linux user and my girlfriend is pregnant.
P.S. I'm an Atheist and I'm not buying that immaculate conception bullshit you're selling.
All heil the Grammar Fuhrer!
Oh, so because a few employees within a company (and maybe a closely related partner) have looked over the source, it's "peer reviewed"? Peer review means that EVERYONE can examine the source, including people you have never met nor have even heard their names. It means that people you absolutely hate can review your source, not just a few of your employees that have no qualms about lying and saying it's all good just to keep their jobs.
In other words, your source code has had as much legitimate peer review as my dick has, and since I'm a Slashdotter, any claims of sexual activity on my part are instantly dubious by that simple fact alone.
If you think that 100 or so odd lines of code can cover every single scenario and manage your heart in every possible conceivable case, you deserve the effects of a situation those 100 or so odd lines of code aren't prepared for.
If that situation leaves you dead, all the better, stupidity should be a capital offense anyways.
And yet the alternative Windows shell is still the same crappy cmd.exe we had back in the days of 2000. Tab completion was always there, the only difference now is that someone flipped a single binary bit in the registry's default settings to turn it on by default.
Desiring less bloat isn't being stuck in the past. Some of those features you describe, I'll probably never use, yet the code that drives them is always consuming RAM in my system, whether I want them too or not, something that with XP, where they don't exist, doesn't happen! (Those features consuming RAM in XP don't happen, I mean, for those too stupid to understand English.)