You must have never walked great distances while reading a book. I'd go so far as to say hardcovers are for people who care about how their bookshelves look, instead of people who actually care about reading. Get off my lawn.
Try reading a book, then you can have an honest opinion about reading books.
As for the bracket columns, why does it really matter to you if somebody else does it ? I personally prefer the opening bracket on the end of the first line (assuming the first line is short, not long) because it saves a near-empty line, so (a) more code fits on my screen without messing with readability and (b) when glancing over code I don't mistake it for a white-line, which would usually indicate some logic break (much like paragraphs in a "real" language). I see no real problem with putting it on its own line, it's just not the way I personally prefer it.
Proper indentation fixes the problem of code block visibility, any decent IDE has easy buttons to move blocks or "beautify", and moving the cursor over } should really highlight the corresponding {.
Use the brackets for any logical code block including ifs and whiles, use proper indentation, use white-lines where necessary, use a decent IDE, there really is no issue with one versus the other. I could see your point as defendable when coding in notepad, but well..;)
I'll skip on Java being a horrible language, everybody who isn't a Java fanboy and has used a fair number of languages already knows this.
But nearly as fast as C++ or just 10% slower ? That's not my experience, at all. Of course, first I could comment on how calling a language slow or fast is at best strange, as it often really depends on the compiler / interpreter / assembler (ok not that one), and what exactly you are trying to do with it.
Then I could perhaps comment on other native languages, for example C(--), or Object Pascal. Both of which are still significantly faster than Java. Or perhaps assembler could be mentioned. A response could be how C is just as fast as assembler, or that its ridiculous to be hand-optimizing in assembler, or nobody remembers how to do it, etc. And sometimes that would be true, but there are various use-cases where it isn't. Most programmers just never (or rarely) encounter these use-cases.
Perhaps we could discuss productivity. How fast is it to develop something (ie costs) vs execution speed. C# has Java easily beat if you don't need to support anything that isn't Windows. Better language, better libraries. Finding a good Java coder is more difficult (and thus costly) as well due to the huge fragmentation of toolkits and frameworks for Java. Not to mention that for C# you can use Visual Studio, which is simply the best IDE there is. Comparing for example Eclipse to Visual Studio and having Eclipse coming out on top - that just makes anybody who has used both extensively question your sanity. Eclipse is just so much slower than Visual Studio, that aside from all the great features Eclipse doesn't have, you halve your productivity just by the need to constantly wait on your IDE. Sure, it's only a second here, half a second there, but it happens several times a minute. That difference alone is easily worth the price of Visual Studio several times over. Seeing as Eclipse is also made in Java, I guess that's another hit for Java's speed as well.
We could discuss what things you could do with the language. Let's take image manipulation as an easy example. Say I would like to perform channel auto-optimization on an image in code (without depending on an external library to do it for me). The code is straightforward enough, just a few loops and a few calculations, with millions of iterations. It can easily be the case that the C equivalent of this code runs in milliseconds, while the Java code runs in seconds (if not minutes). Quite a bit bigger difference than 10%. In my experience, in things like these, C# has Java beat speedwise as well, though not by that big a margin. And that's an example where speed matters. Of course, we could also discuss enterprise business logic. It may well be that Java is only 10% slower there, but that's a place where speed doesn't matter nearly as much as the logic isn't usually the bottleneck and it is easy to throw more hardware at it.
Which brings me to the conclusion: nothing in your comment makes any sense at all. Java may indeed be only 10% slower than C++, but this is in instances where speed doesn't really matter in the first place. Java is certainly not the fastest thing you can get after C++ by any margin. And in the game industry the difference is far bigger than 10%, since that usually involves a lot of memory manipulation logic for high end games which is something Java is especially horrible at, and the speed difference is orders of magnitude greater than the 10% quoted. Sure, there is lots of boring business software built in Java, but I've yet to encounter the case where it was actually the best tool for the job in practise, taking into account all the other dependencies of the package. Not saying those cases don't exist, I can imagine a few of them.
Look, I severely dislike Apple, their products, their methods, and their policies.
However, this seems to be much ado about nothing. I have actually read the entire thread, and it appears to be a simple software issue that can be resolved by disabling some fan control package. The issue does not occur under stress testing in Windows 7. Put those two together, the issue becomes one or two bad packages, which will be resolved in an update sooner or later (for those that blew $3k on a computer, I hope sooner).
Of course, how Apple has handled the situation is abysmal, and I'm quite surprised seeing the people in the thread defending Apple support as they do.
In the end though: nothing to see here, move along, this is not a reason for major Apple bashing or Apple vs PC debates, and yes, even Apple can and does release bugged software now and then.
While I won't necessarily agree, Moon is a movie any sci-fi fan who hasn't seen it yet should go rent/download ASAP. Just mentioning it because I personally never even heard about this movie until a friend recommended it to me, and I found it quite odd I never heard about it before seeing how good a movie it is.
Mod parent up, good points given, couldn't agree more.
I'm a big fan of both sci-fi and fantasy books, and have a great many shelves filled with them. But honestly, the "purists" should sod off the same way all extremists should and you know... get a life or something and stop being a hating basementdweller.
And aren't we all glad about that. Granted, it's not all Java's fault, and a large part is due to how Android's UI framework works, but I don't think I've ever talked to an Android developer who:
(a) didn't work for Google, or (b) doesn't have proper experience with at least 3 other languages and/or frameworks
and didn't really hate Java. And I assure you, I know a LOT of "mobile developers".
"I think this again falls into the realm of edge cases. In fact, I don't really see a good use for C++. The pieces of your program which really need that speed should be in C or asm, because you're going to be optimizing tons of shit by hand that the JVM (or your VM of choice) would otherwise try to do for you. The pieces which don't are now a liability -- there's really no reason I should ever segfault in the GUI portion of my code."
I'm suprised at how much I agree with this - some years ago I would have certainly disagreed. I like optimizing stuff in C or asm, quite frankly, it's probably what I enjoy most in coding for some awkward reason. But, these days I find I do most of the high-level stuff in either C# or Java (though the latter only under protest). However I think this is also a flaw in C++ itself. Why that is is a lengthy opinion piece, but let's just say there are other natively compiled languages with full support for all that C(++) has to offer, just not as terrible to use nor as inviting to create memory and pointer related issues for yourself. In fact, in these languages I have rarely even encountered this issues, just because of how the languages are built up. C++ is really a terrible example of native code.
I don't have much time to type so a quicky here: what a load of crap.
I read a lot of bad comments here re: Samsung and updates and Tab quality / speed. Samsung updates just fine, the international model of the SGS for example has had Froyo for almost half a year now. Just not your carrier branded models. The Tab slow ? No way. If you're running a couple of apps, it lags less than the iPad does. The Tab is a great device - though soon there will be much better - but the Streak simply isn't it. The only really slow thing on the Tab is the stock browser, which has a bug which causes it to crawl with larger pages. Leaked firmwares and other browser builds don't have this issue. I have a LOT of Android devices, the Tab is by far the fastest device.
And who decided to benchmark these devices with Neocore ? That person should be banned from doing reviews for life. Neocore is from Qualcomm, which has by far the weakest GPU. Neither the Tegra 2 nor the Hummingbird have any problem running Neocore at the maximum speed possible before the frame limiter kicks in, at - surprise surprise - around 55 fps.
It's interesting and could somewhat work, with Amazon's experience in finding the perfect price point.
However, developers have some experience here too, and regularly adjust prices in the search for the perfect price point themselves.
All in all, I don't really get why we, the developers, should submit our apps to yet another app store. Aren't these things meant to make everything easier for everyone ? The consumer has yet another app store to visit, the developer another one to maintain. How will people even get the Amazon app store ? Why would people install it, seeing their phones already come with Google Market, which is of course a bigger store than Amazon's ? Even if Amazons store is pre-installed, would it actually be used ?
Take for example the Samsung app store for Android. It's pre-installed on all Samsung Android devices. There's only a handful of apps in it, and sales through this store are abysmal - so bad it's not worth the effort to have your apps available in there. And we sell quite some apps across various platforms!
Not to mention it's one more app store to track sales through, which is actually a lot of work for some of us. If you sell a lot of copies, you need to have your taxes in order, so you need to get the right reports from the app store. This will differ per country, but in our country (inside the EU), we need to charge 19% VAT for all sales made to European customers, and then hand this money over to the taxman. That sounds pretty straightforward, and it is, as long as you have the information about how much is sold (and for how much) inside and outside the EU. You can imagine this can be quite some work ( = money) for some of these app stores as their reporting is generally terrible (Google has the reports you want only if you are from the US or UK, or make less than 500 sales a day). The app store needs enough users and sales to warrant even bothering with the extra work, or it's a net loss to publish apps there. I don't see Amazon getting there any time soon.
Again, the EULA is to legally protect. Though of course there are exceptions (usually bigcorp), the EULA is typically much more restrictive then developers actually care about.
For the specific case you bring, take into consideration that in various countries you cannot legally make a distinction between a "normal" user and a "corporate" user.
If the EULA would for example state you may install a single copy on all the devices you own, this (for some) opens up the possibility of bigcorp getting a single license and installing it for 100.000 seats, perfectly legal. Bigcorp is a legal entity of itself, and owns all those seats...
I know, bigcorp often abuses EULAs, and most people only come into contact with bigcorp software. But when getting software from smaller shops, take the EULA with a great deal of salt, and ask yourself: do they care about this at all, or is it just to cover their ass legally? More often than not, you'll find the latter is the case. I know lots of small software house owners, and they'll tell you the same. In the end, there's much more smallcorp software around than bigcorp:)
Not to mention that EULAs are usually drafted by your lawyers, not by the producing branch of the company, and they'll try to cover anything and everything (which is of course their job). See all the contract negotiating that goes on with any deal - it's usually 90% bitchfight between company A's lawyers and company B's lawyers, both trying to put all liability and costs in the other company's shoes - and 10% between business people trying to make an actual working deal.
We have aggressive EULA's as well, but as we're based in Europe we also have strong consumer laws to work with. The EULA's main purpose is to stop lawsuits dead in their tracks and just be reasonable about usage.
Sure, if the software doesn't work as the user expects it to, we will either attempt to fix it first or issue a refund. Its the user's choice whether we try to fix it first or refund immediately (no questions asked), if the refund request is made within 30 days of purchase. We generally offer a refund long beyond those 30 days as well, we have free fully-functional 21-day trial versions, and you have to agree to the EULA before even purchasing. The EULA is clearly linked, not hidden, and a refund request can be done by a simple email. We even allow you to use a single copy on all your computers instead of purchasing a copy per computer. I know, people usually do this with all their software, but it is usually against the EULA.
We find this entirely reasonable and gives the user more than enough chance to see if it works as they expect it to, and is actually more lenient to the end-users than is legally required. The right to refund (in our case) is only 7 days, and the manufacturer (us) has the right to attempt a fix 3 times before having to refund.
But you still need the EULA as developers, because the liability is insane. For example, say you were walking around while holding your netbook in one hand and typing on it with the other, while the software is running (which is a pretty weird thing to do in any case), and you walk under a bus, we may actually be liable under law. I've never heard of an actual case like this, but legally, it's possible. So the EULA needs a clause which disallows you from usage when usage could result in serious injury to anyone (not just the user). That's just one of a great many examples. As over here it's not allowed to simply have a clause which waives liability for many cases, each case like this needs to be covered explicitly by the EULA.
And even with a strong EULA, you simply can't cover all these cases. Luckily, the place we operate from is not (yet) a sueing society like the USA, and awarded damages are usually limited to provable loss (and not some arbitrary number some money hungry lawyer thought up, or emotional damage and whatnot). Add to that that due to our exact situation - contrary to what someone posted above - we actually are able to limit the court's location where you can sue us to our own country.
Still, the possibility for insane lawsuits are still there, and simply cannot be fully covered by an EULA.
Now ask the question, what is wrong here? Are we manufacturers evil for trying to protect ourselves from people seeking to make an easy buck at our expense? We could cover that, but then a single copy would not cost $15, it would cost $15000. I sincerely doubt the average end-user would like to pay that amount for software. Or are the laws insane for allowing end-users to act irresponsibly and then succesfully blaming others for their own mistakes? In my book that is behaviour you try to teach kids not to have, though it seems a great many missed that part of their education.
If laws, end-users, and manufcaturers would simply be reasonable, EULA's would not be needed. Blame not the manufacturer for including a EULA, blame the law for needing one! We work hard for our money just like you do, and no, we don't think you're entitled to our life savings because you stubbed your toe.
I sincerely doubt that the summary's claim is true, any decent graphics card should either underclock itself to lower the heat generation, or simply BSOD on you. Furthermore, if scenes are very easily rendered, wouldn't this also automatically mean that less of the chip is used ? I'm no expert in graphics hardware design, but one would think (I know, bad idea) that they would have special parts of the silicon dedicated to some more complicated tasks, which in a case like this wouldn't be used at all. If that is true, then it would mean less of the silicon is used than during rendering of really complicated and intensive scenes that make your FPS drop below your screen's refresh rate, and thus would automatically generate less heat.
One thing that I know is true on some systems (my experience is mainly with mobile) that artificially limiting the FPS does have huge effects on energy consumption (and thus heat generation).
This might sound surprising, but a lot of mobile devices simply have a non-operating VSYNC. As in, the system will think and report it is using VSYNC, but in reality it simply does not work. This can lead to all sorts of interesting artefacts and stuttering when an OpenGL game's FPS blows through the screen's refresh rate. As mobile devices generally have either 50 or 60hz displays, (optionally) artificially limiting the framerate in the game's code (or in patched drivers, as seems to be more common on these devices) by making sure no more than one frame is rendered per 18ms or so both does wonders for visual quality, framerate stability, and indeed energy consumption (and thus heat generation) - the latter only if the game is much simpler than the chip can handle, which on newer mobiles is very common.
If you assume the same holds true for "real" computers, it makes me wonder why games do not try to do something similar - regardless of whether not doing it kills cards or not. After all, if you can detect the screen's framerate in code, and you are not in benchmark mode, there is no reason to render faster than the screen can display, all it does is use more power. Artificially limiting the FPS in such a case would make the game greener - assuming VSYNC is not already turned on.
Wow, you haven't been able to do this using any Windows since... long ago? With only about 10 clicks too. Not to mention my cellphone could already do this for ages. This news is approximately 8 years old, congrats Slashdot!
I too, have been disappointed by Robert Jordan's later books. When he passed away I was really pissed off the series wasn't done yet while he could have finished it 6 books ago, and I had never heard of Brandon Sanderson.
However, I decided to check out Sanderson's works - and I was amazed. He is now one of my favorite fantasy authors. While the man himself seems to be a great fan of Jordan's series, I would personally say each of his books surpass the entire Wheel of Time series in both writing style and originality. While it is my opinion that his stories are not as 'epic' as other series, they are an absolute joy to read and I found it hard to stop reading them (and actually get some shut-eye). Stop bashing on the series and give Sanderson a chance, he may actually surprise you and make these closing chapters of WoT worth the read.
In another comment someone mentioned picking up the "Song of Ice and Fire" series from George R.R. Martin in a comment above. I did the same and I was also completely blown away! However, one must note that it has been a while since his last publication in the series and the next book is getting more and more delayed, while George R.R. Martin himself has now passed 60 years of age and still has at least two more books to write [after this one]. Let's hope we'll not have to pull "a Sanderson" on him as well.
Either way, if you enjoyed George R.R. Martin and are looking for something worthy to read, you might also enjoy Steven Erikson. While he's no Martin, his "Malazan book of the Fallen" series is definitely worth reading!
I'm not sure if a browser like Opera, which is available on many many [many many] platforms - from set-top boxes to game consoles to mobile phones to actual PCs - can responsibly be called an underdog browser by anyone - regardless of the opinion of the submitter. And it runs pretty well on all those platforms too. The only thing I've seen Firefox, Chrome or IE run decently on is a PC (Fennic? Mobile IE? Surely you jest!).
(Disclaimer: I never use Opera on my PC's, but I do use it on all my mobiles)
Actually modern (Object) Pascal compilers generally use a PtrUInt for it - an unsigned integer with the same width as a pointer - so a string can be 4GB long on 32-bit systems, and a lot longer on 64-bit systems.
It's a really handy construct though, and IMHO works a lot easier than null-terminated strings. For one thing, you can put any data you want in a string, which prevents a lot of silly stuff like this and can also be really handy depending on what you are doing. (It's ridiculous how often you hear about similar issues to this one with null-terminated strings). Aside from that, it is also more efficient speed-wise to do operations - for example determining string length is much quicker, which you need for many operations.
Note that modern (Object) Pascal compilers also sneakily keep \0 character(s) behind the string data itself (but this is hidden from you) so you can pass a pointer to the first character of the string directly to null-terminated string functions and it'll Just Work(tm). Obviously those functions will bork on \0 character(s) mid-string again, though.
I honestly don't know who came up with the null-terminated string idea or why, but from any way I look at it (aside from performance/efficiency reasons in some - but certainly not all - cases) it seems like a terrible idea. Of course, IMHO.
(first off my apologies, though it does contain a comment on your posts, it also contains comments on this entire/. article, and "you" is generally not directed at parent post, but at everybody else)
I don't understand what the problem is. First off, let me clarify that I am one of those 40% jerk drivers. But only when it can be done in a safe-ish manner. You can't go 90 if everybody else is doing 60 and you don't have the room to do it (the road is filled up). As my driving teacher used to say (freely translated) "speed is not a matter of regulations, its a matter of available space and visibility". While he meant it as a reason to go slower at times (bad view, bad weather, etc) than the speed limit, it can also be applied to going faster. In fact, I have often driven below the speed limit and found other drivers reckless with their speeds. And yes, I do think people going the speed limit in the left lane while having no good reason for being there should go die in a fire. But that's just IMHO. Over here there's always a lot of talk of Merc, Audi and Beamer drivers and how antisocial they are. Well I'm not one of those people [yet], but I have respect for how most of these "antisocials" drive. If they are doing 130 and I'm doing 160, I know I won't have to break for them or even worry about them at all - they will have made room to let me pass - and the same back at them from me. They cause accidents? I have never seen even ONE of these caliber of people making a phone call, doing make up, and whatnot while driving (and I assure you I drive for hours daily). I've seen them avoid and get around very tricky situations where your average driver would crash many times, though. They drive, and that's all they do. If you go fast, you better pay attention, something most people simply do not do. There is nothing else important in your car. Nothing. The road is ALL that is important!
Back to the motorcycle drivers. Over here (central Europe) it is perfectly normal in a jam (and only in a jam, low-speed or unmoving traffic) to have them "filter" (I actually had to look up what you were talking about, as I was unfamiliar with the term) - note that is only allowed to do this at low speed (even if higher than yours) for the motorcyclists as well. In the left two lanes of a highway, (attentive) drivers in the left lane will have their car as far on the left as possible, and the lane to the right of that as far right as possible, leaving AMPLE space for motorcyclists to pass (and keep in mind are roads are a fair deal narrower than American roads are). They can fit easily, there's no reason not to let them pass [at all]... Really, if there was room for you to pass with your car, would you not like to use this room? It causes zero delay for car drivers and you're doing other people a favor. So the other guy picked a smarter way of transportation than you did... you being dumb is not a reason to be angry at them! You did not see him coming? Seriously, you are in a traffic jam and you do not have enough time to look around? Are you counting boogers, or what? There is nothing else to do than look around, and if you were a proper driver you wouldn't need to anyways, because you would have left room for them to pass and check all your mirrors (even subconsciently) every few seconds anyways. Changing lanes in a traffic jam is counter-productive for the entire jam in general anyways, so that's not an excuse either. I cannot think of a single real reason that doesn't involve the car driver not deserving a drivers license to not let motorcyclists do this.
On the other side of the coin, of course there are instances where motorcyclists overdo it.. when the general traffic speed is too high or their relative speed is too high (going fast is okay, but relative speeds are always very important). Or in actual cities where they just HAVE to be in front of you at the traffic light. If I'm in front of the queue, you can be damned sure I'll floor it, and I assure you my car is very fast. If you filter in f
Taken completely by surprise by your comment about Brontosaurus not being a proper name for a Brontosaurus (I somehow missed this) I decided to invoke the evil (Google) and look it up. I have decided your shaking your fist in fury is completely justified and I shall join you in this endeavour. Other amazing discoveries include that such beasts as pterodactyls are by definition (formally) not dinosaurs.
Coupled with all the tech science and space mags I read today, this was an informative day!
Dang, I read about this a week ago waiting for an appointment, skimming through the paper they had lying around. It was an interview with the inventor, but for the life of me I can't remember what the watch was called. Be damned forgetful mind!
It's a good solution though, and I think for young children as well... what could possibly go wrong?
Older children too even, but then you'd need to implement a system like the GPS being in the phone and you not being able to look at the location until you've tried calling at least twice (and not being answered).
It is a good quote:) About the translation thing though, I've noticed these 'expert translators' are not often very good. They know their languages well, of course, but often not the technology. Finding a pro translator that does know both is hard and very expensive. The volunteers are often enthousiasts who do know both the language and the software/technobabble needed. While it may not always be apparent for simple products (in terms of technobabble involved), niche tech apps can quickly run into this problem. I've seen very good volunteer translation work and very bad professional... even at closed-source commercial corps.
WMWifiRouter, JoikuSpot, PDANet... etc?
on
Mobile Wi-Fi Hot Spot
·
· Score: 5, Informative
"What if you had a personal Wi-Fi bubble, a private hot spot, that followed you everywhere you go? Incredibly, there is such a thing."
Yeah, it's called a phone!
If you have a Windows Mobile phone with an internet plan, you could use WMWifiRouter(the most advanced of the pack), which has been available since 2007, and was the very first app to do this.
If you have a Symbian phone, you could use JoikuSpot, which has been available since 2008.
To continue, for iPhone you could use PDANet. For Android there are also several programs available as well!
Why would you use something like this and get another data subscription when all you need is already in your pocket? Aside from the internet plan which you are likely to have already, all of these software are available for a small one-time fee - likely lower than one month of the data package itself.
Funny thing, none of those apps ever made it out of the firehose when I posted them. What makes this (very expensive and limited) product so special?
Slashdot Mirror
You must have never walked great distances while reading a book. I'd go so far as to say hardcovers are for people who care about how their bookshelves look, instead of people who actually care about reading. Get off my lawn.
Try reading a book, then you can have an honest opinion about reading books.
Agreed on the loops.
As for the bracket columns, why does it really matter to you if somebody else does it ? I personally prefer the opening bracket on the end of the first line (assuming the first line is short, not long) because it saves a near-empty line, so (a) more code fits on my screen without messing with readability and (b) when glancing over code I don't mistake it for a white-line, which would usually indicate some logic break (much like paragraphs in a "real" language). I see no real problem with putting it on its own line, it's just not the way I personally prefer it.
Proper indentation fixes the problem of code block visibility, any decent IDE has easy buttons to move blocks or "beautify", and moving the cursor over } should really highlight the corresponding {.
Use the brackets for any logical code block including ifs and whiles, use proper indentation, use white-lines where necessary, use a decent IDE, there really is no issue with one versus the other. I could see your point as defendable when coding in notepad, but well.. ;)
No, it just isn't.
I'll skip on Java being a horrible language, everybody who isn't a Java fanboy and has used a fair number of languages already knows this.
But nearly as fast as C++ or just 10% slower ? That's not my experience, at all. Of course, first I could comment on how calling a language slow or fast is at best strange, as it often really depends on the compiler / interpreter / assembler (ok not that one), and what exactly you are trying to do with it.
Then I could perhaps comment on other native languages, for example C(--), or Object Pascal. Both of which are still significantly faster than Java. Or perhaps assembler could be mentioned. A response could be how C is just as fast as assembler, or that its ridiculous to be hand-optimizing in assembler, or nobody remembers how to do it, etc. And sometimes that would be true, but there are various use-cases where it isn't. Most programmers just never (or rarely) encounter these use-cases.
Perhaps we could discuss productivity. How fast is it to develop something (ie costs) vs execution speed. C# has Java easily beat if you don't need to support anything that isn't Windows. Better language, better libraries. Finding a good Java coder is more difficult (and thus costly) as well due to the huge fragmentation of toolkits and frameworks for Java. Not to mention that for C# you can use Visual Studio, which is simply the best IDE there is. Comparing for example Eclipse to Visual Studio and having Eclipse coming out on top - that just makes anybody who has used both extensively question your sanity. Eclipse is just so much slower than Visual Studio, that aside from all the great features Eclipse doesn't have, you halve your productivity just by the need to constantly wait on your IDE. Sure, it's only a second here, half a second there, but it happens several times a minute. That difference alone is easily worth the price of Visual Studio several times over. Seeing as Eclipse is also made in Java, I guess that's another hit for Java's speed as well.
We could discuss what things you could do with the language. Let's take image manipulation as an easy example. Say I would like to perform channel auto-optimization on an image in code (without depending on an external library to do it for me). The code is straightforward enough, just a few loops and a few calculations, with millions of iterations. It can easily be the case that the C equivalent of this code runs in milliseconds, while the Java code runs in seconds (if not minutes). Quite a bit bigger difference than 10%. In my experience, in things like these, C# has Java beat speedwise as well, though not by that big a margin. And that's an example where speed matters. Of course, we could also discuss enterprise business logic. It may well be that Java is only 10% slower there, but that's a place where speed doesn't matter nearly as much as the logic isn't usually the bottleneck and it is easy to throw more hardware at it.
Which brings me to the conclusion: nothing in your comment makes any sense at all. Java may indeed be only 10% slower than C++, but this is in instances where speed doesn't really matter in the first place. Java is certainly not the fastest thing you can get after C++ by any margin. And in the game industry the difference is far bigger than 10%, since that usually involves a lot of memory manipulation logic for high end games which is something Java is especially horrible at, and the speed difference is orders of magnitude greater than the 10% quoted. Sure, there is lots of boring business software built in Java, but I've yet to encounter the case where it was actually the best tool for the job in practise, taking into account all the other dependencies of the package. Not saying those cases don't exist, I can imagine a few of them.
Breaking news: reality not exactly as described by others - basementdwellers swear revenge!
To the xkcd, trusty sidekicks!
Look, I severely dislike Apple, their products, their methods, and their policies.
However, this seems to be much ado about nothing. I have actually read the entire thread, and it appears to be a simple software issue that can be resolved by disabling some fan control package. The issue does not occur under stress testing in Windows 7. Put those two together, the issue becomes one or two bad packages, which will be resolved in an update sooner or later (for those that blew $3k on a computer, I hope sooner).
Of course, how Apple has handled the situation is abysmal, and I'm quite surprised seeing the people in the thread defending Apple support as they do.
In the end though: nothing to see here, move along, this is not a reason for major Apple bashing or Apple vs PC debates, and yes, even Apple can and does release bugged software now and then.
While I won't necessarily agree, Moon is a movie any sci-fi fan who hasn't seen it yet should go rent/download ASAP. Just mentioning it because I personally never even heard about this movie until a friend recommended it to me, and I found it quite odd I never heard about it before seeing how good a movie it is.
Mod parent up, good points given, couldn't agree more.
I'm a big fan of both sci-fi and fantasy books, and have a great many shelves filled with them. But honestly, the "purists" should sod off the same way all extremists should and you know... get a life or something and stop being a hating basementdweller.
And aren't we all glad about that. Granted, it's not all Java's fault, and a large part is due to how Android's UI framework works, but I don't think I've ever talked to an Android developer who:
(a) didn't work for Google, or
(b) doesn't have proper experience with at least 3 other languages and/or frameworks
and didn't really hate Java. And I assure you, I know a LOT of "mobile developers".
"I think this again falls into the realm of edge cases. In fact, I don't really see a good use for C++. The pieces of your program which really need that speed should be in C or asm, because you're going to be optimizing tons of shit by hand that the JVM (or your VM of choice) would otherwise try to do for you. The pieces which don't are now a liability -- there's really no reason I should ever segfault in the GUI portion of my code."
I'm suprised at how much I agree with this - some years ago I would have certainly disagreed. I like optimizing stuff in C or asm, quite frankly, it's probably what I enjoy most in coding for some awkward reason. But, these days I find I do most of the high-level stuff in either C# or Java (though the latter only under protest). However I think this is also a flaw in C++ itself. Why that is is a lengthy opinion piece, but let's just say there are other natively compiled languages with full support for all that C(++) has to offer, just not as terrible to use nor as inviting to create memory and pointer related issues for yourself. In fact, in these languages I have rarely even encountered this issues, just because of how the languages are built up. C++ is really a terrible example of native code.
I don't have much time to type so a quicky here: what a load of crap.
I read a lot of bad comments here re: Samsung and updates and Tab quality / speed. Samsung updates just fine, the international model of the SGS for example has had Froyo for almost half a year now. Just not your carrier branded models. The Tab slow ? No way. If you're running a couple of apps, it lags less than the iPad does. The Tab is a great device - though soon there will be much better - but the Streak simply isn't it. The only really slow thing on the Tab is the stock browser, which has a bug which causes it to crawl with larger pages. Leaked firmwares and other browser builds don't have this issue. I have a LOT of Android devices, the Tab is by far the fastest device.
And who decided to benchmark these devices with Neocore ? That person should be banned from doing reviews for life. Neocore is from Qualcomm, which has by far the weakest GPU. Neither the Tegra 2 nor the Hummingbird have any problem running Neocore at the maximum speed possible before the frame limiter kicks in, at - surprise surprise - around 55 fps.
It's interesting and could somewhat work, with Amazon's experience in finding the perfect price point.
However, developers have some experience here too, and regularly adjust prices in the search for the perfect price point themselves.
All in all, I don't really get why we, the developers, should submit our apps to yet another app store. Aren't these things meant to make everything easier for everyone ? The consumer has yet another app store to visit, the developer another one to maintain. How will people even get the Amazon app store ? Why would people install it, seeing their phones already come with Google Market, which is of course a bigger store than Amazon's ? Even if Amazons store is pre-installed, would it actually be used ?
Take for example the Samsung app store for Android. It's pre-installed on all Samsung Android devices. There's only a handful of apps in it, and sales through this store are abysmal - so bad it's not worth the effort to have your apps available in there. And we sell quite some apps across various platforms!
Not to mention it's one more app store to track sales through, which is actually a lot of work for some of us. If you sell a lot of copies, you need to have your taxes in order, so you need to get the right reports from the app store. This will differ per country, but in our country (inside the EU), we need to charge 19% VAT for all sales made to European customers, and then hand this money over to the taxman. That sounds pretty straightforward, and it is, as long as you have the information about how much is sold (and for how much) inside and outside the EU. You can imagine this can be quite some work ( = money) for some of these app stores as their reporting is generally terrible (Google has the reports you want only if you are from the US or UK, or make less than 500 sales a day). The app store needs enough users and sales to warrant even bothering with the extra work, or it's a net loss to publish apps there. I don't see Amazon getting there any time soon.
I don't get it. That page seems like the right page to me too, but it also says they DECLINED on ACTA with 306 votes for and 322 votes against.
So what gives ? Can anyone explain ?
Again, the EULA is to legally protect. Though of course there are exceptions (usually bigcorp), the EULA is typically much more restrictive then developers actually care about.
For the specific case you bring, take into consideration that in various countries you cannot legally make a distinction between a "normal" user and a "corporate" user.
If the EULA would for example state you may install a single copy on all the devices you own, this (for some) opens up the possibility of bigcorp getting a single license and installing it for 100.000 seats, perfectly legal. Bigcorp is a legal entity of itself, and owns all those seats...
I know, bigcorp often abuses EULAs, and most people only come into contact with bigcorp software. But when getting software from smaller shops, take the EULA with a great deal of salt, and ask yourself: do they care about this at all, or is it just to cover their ass legally? More often than not, you'll find the latter is the case. I know lots of small software house owners, and they'll tell you the same. In the end, there's much more smallcorp software around than bigcorp :)
Not to mention that EULAs are usually drafted by your lawyers, not by the producing branch of the company, and they'll try to cover anything and everything (which is of course their job). See all the contract negotiating that goes on with any deal - it's usually 90% bitchfight between company A's lawyers and company B's lawyers, both trying to put all liability and costs in the other company's shoes - and 10% between business people trying to make an actual working deal.
As co-owner of a small software house, I agree.
We have aggressive EULA's as well, but as we're based in Europe we also have strong consumer laws to work with. The EULA's main purpose is to stop lawsuits dead in their tracks and just be reasonable about usage.
Sure, if the software doesn't work as the user expects it to, we will either attempt to fix it first or issue a refund. Its the user's choice whether we try to fix it first or refund immediately (no questions asked), if the refund request is made within 30 days of purchase. We generally offer a refund long beyond those 30 days as well, we have free fully-functional 21-day trial versions, and you have to agree to the EULA before even purchasing. The EULA is clearly linked, not hidden, and a refund request can be done by a simple email. We even allow you to use a single copy on all your computers instead of purchasing a copy per computer. I know, people usually do this with all their software, but it is usually against the EULA.
We find this entirely reasonable and gives the user more than enough chance to see if it works as they expect it to, and is actually more lenient to the end-users than is legally required. The right to refund (in our case) is only 7 days, and the manufacturer (us) has the right to attempt a fix 3 times before having to refund.
But you still need the EULA as developers, because the liability is insane. For example, say you were walking around while holding your netbook in one hand and typing on it with the other, while the software is running (which is a pretty weird thing to do in any case), and you walk under a bus, we may actually be liable under law. I've never heard of an actual case like this, but legally, it's possible. So the EULA needs a clause which disallows you from usage when usage could result in serious injury to anyone (not just the user). That's just one of a great many examples. As over here it's not allowed to simply have a clause which waives liability for many cases, each case like this needs to be covered explicitly by the EULA.
And even with a strong EULA, you simply can't cover all these cases. Luckily, the place we operate from is not (yet) a sueing society like the USA, and awarded damages are usually limited to provable loss (and not some arbitrary number some money hungry lawyer thought up, or emotional damage and whatnot). Add to that that due to our exact situation - contrary to what someone posted above - we actually are able to limit the court's location where you can sue us to our own country.
Still, the possibility for insane lawsuits are still there, and simply cannot be fully covered by an EULA.
Now ask the question, what is wrong here? Are we manufacturers evil for trying to protect ourselves from people seeking to make an easy buck at our expense? We could cover that, but then a single copy would not cost $15, it would cost $15000. I sincerely doubt the average end-user would like to pay that amount for software. Or are the laws insane for allowing end-users to act irresponsibly and then succesfully blaming others for their own mistakes? In my book that is behaviour you try to teach kids not to have, though it seems a great many missed that part of their education.
If laws, end-users, and manufcaturers would simply be reasonable, EULA's would not be needed. Blame not the manufacturer for including a EULA, blame the law for needing one! We work hard for our money just like you do, and no, we don't think you're entitled to our life savings because you stubbed your toe.
I sincerely doubt that the summary's claim is true, any decent graphics card should either underclock itself to lower the heat generation, or simply BSOD on you. Furthermore, if scenes are very easily rendered, wouldn't this also automatically mean that less of the chip is used ? I'm no expert in graphics hardware design, but one would think (I know, bad idea) that they would have special parts of the silicon dedicated to some more complicated tasks, which in a case like this wouldn't be used at all. If that is true, then it would mean less of the silicon is used than during rendering of really complicated and intensive scenes that make your FPS drop below your screen's refresh rate, and thus would automatically generate less heat.
One thing that I know is true on some systems (my experience is mainly with mobile) that artificially limiting the FPS does have huge effects on energy consumption (and thus heat generation).
This might sound surprising, but a lot of mobile devices simply have a non-operating VSYNC. As in, the system will think and report it is using VSYNC, but in reality it simply does not work. This can lead to all sorts of interesting artefacts and stuttering when an OpenGL game's FPS blows through the screen's refresh rate. As mobile devices generally have either 50 or 60hz displays, (optionally) artificially limiting the framerate in the game's code (or in patched drivers, as seems to be more common on these devices) by making sure no more than one frame is rendered per 18ms or so both does wonders for visual quality, framerate stability, and indeed energy consumption (and thus heat generation) - the latter only if the game is much simpler than the chip can handle, which on newer mobiles is very common.
If you assume the same holds true for "real" computers, it makes me wonder why games do not try to do something similar - regardless of whether not doing it kills cards or not. After all, if you can detect the screen's framerate in code, and you are not in benchmark mode, there is no reason to render faster than the screen can display, all it does is use more power. Artificially limiting the FPS in such a case would make the game greener - assuming VSYNC is not already turned on.
Wow, you haven't been able to do this using any Windows since... long ago? With only about 10 clicks too. Not to mention my cellphone could already do this for ages. This news is approximately 8 years old, congrats Slashdot!
I too, have been disappointed by Robert Jordan's later books. When he passed away I was really pissed off the series wasn't done yet while he could have finished it 6 books ago, and I had never heard of Brandon Sanderson.
However, I decided to check out Sanderson's works - and I was amazed. He is now one of my favorite fantasy authors. While the man himself seems to be a great fan of Jordan's series, I would personally say each of his books surpass the entire Wheel of Time series in both writing style and originality. While it is my opinion that his stories are not as 'epic' as other series, they are an absolute joy to read and I found it hard to stop reading them (and actually get some shut-eye). Stop bashing on the series and give Sanderson a chance, he may actually surprise you and make these closing chapters of WoT worth the read.
In another comment someone mentioned picking up the "Song of Ice and Fire" series from George R.R. Martin in a comment above. I did the same and I was also completely blown away! However, one must note that it has been a while since his last publication in the series and the next book is getting more and more delayed, while George R.R. Martin himself has now passed 60 years of age and still has at least two more books to write [after this one]. Let's hope we'll not have to pull "a Sanderson" on him as well.
Either way, if you enjoyed George R.R. Martin and are looking for something worthy to read, you might also enjoy Steven Erikson. While he's no Martin, his "Malazan book of the Fallen" series is definitely worth reading!
I'm not sure if a browser like Opera, which is available on many many [many many] platforms - from set-top boxes to game consoles to mobile phones to actual PCs - can responsibly be called an underdog browser by anyone - regardless of the opinion of the submitter. And it runs pretty well on all those platforms too. The only thing I've seen Firefox, Chrome or IE run decently on is a PC (Fennic? Mobile IE? Surely you jest!). (Disclaimer: I never use Opera on my PC's, but I do use it on all my mobiles)
Actually modern (Object) Pascal compilers generally use a PtrUInt for it - an unsigned integer with the same width as a pointer - so a string can be 4GB long on 32-bit systems, and a lot longer on 64-bit systems.
It's a really handy construct though, and IMHO works a lot easier than null-terminated strings. For one thing, you can put any data you want in a string, which prevents a lot of silly stuff like this and can also be really handy depending on what you are doing. (It's ridiculous how often you hear about similar issues to this one with null-terminated strings). Aside from that, it is also more efficient speed-wise to do operations - for example determining string length is much quicker, which you need for many operations.
Note that modern (Object) Pascal compilers also sneakily keep \0 character(s) behind the string data itself (but this is hidden from you) so you can pass a pointer to the first character of the string directly to null-terminated string functions and it'll Just Work(tm). Obviously those functions will bork on \0 character(s) mid-string again, though.
I honestly don't know who came up with the null-terminated string idea or why, but from any way I look at it (aside from performance/efficiency reasons in some - but certainly not all - cases) it seems like a terrible idea. Of course, IMHO.
(first off my apologies, though it does contain a comment on your posts, it also contains comments on this entire /. article, and "you" is generally not directed at parent post, but at everybody else)
I don't understand what the problem is. First off, let me clarify that I am one of those 40% jerk drivers. But only when it can be done in a safe-ish manner. You can't go 90 if everybody else is doing 60 and you don't have the room to do it (the road is filled up). As my driving teacher used to say (freely translated) "speed is not a matter of regulations, its a matter of available space and visibility". While he meant it as a reason to go slower at times (bad view, bad weather, etc) than the speed limit, it can also be applied to going faster. In fact, I have often driven below the speed limit and found other drivers reckless with their speeds. And yes, I do think people going the speed limit in the left lane while having no good reason for being there should go die in a fire. But that's just IMHO. Over here there's always a lot of talk of Merc, Audi and Beamer drivers and how antisocial they are. Well I'm not one of those people [yet], but I have respect for how most of these "antisocials" drive. If they are doing 130 and I'm doing 160, I know I won't have to break for them or even worry about them at all - they will have made room to let me pass - and the same back at them from me. They cause accidents? I have never seen even ONE of these caliber of people making a phone call, doing make up, and whatnot while driving (and I assure you I drive for hours daily). I've seen them avoid and get around very tricky situations where your average driver would crash many times, though. They drive, and that's all they do. If you go fast, you better pay attention, something most people simply do not do. There is nothing else important in your car. Nothing. The road is ALL that is important!
Back to the motorcycle drivers. Over here (central Europe) it is perfectly normal in a jam (and only in a jam, low-speed or unmoving traffic) to have them "filter" (I actually had to look up what you were talking about, as I was unfamiliar with the term) - note that is only allowed to do this at low speed (even if higher than yours) for the motorcyclists as well. In the left two lanes of a highway, (attentive) drivers in the left lane will have their car as far on the left as possible, and the lane to the right of that as far right as possible, leaving AMPLE space for motorcyclists to pass (and keep in mind are roads are a fair deal narrower than American roads are). They can fit easily, there's no reason not to let them pass [at all]... Really, if there was room for you to pass with your car, would you not like to use this room? It causes zero delay for car drivers and you're doing other people a favor. So the other guy picked a smarter way of transportation than you did... you being dumb is not a reason to be angry at them! You did not see him coming? Seriously, you are in a traffic jam and you do not have enough time to look around? Are you counting boogers, or what? There is nothing else to do than look around, and if you were a proper driver you wouldn't need to anyways, because you would have left room for them to pass and check all your mirrors (even subconsciently) every few seconds anyways. Changing lanes in a traffic jam is counter-productive for the entire jam in general anyways, so that's not an excuse either. I cannot think of a single real reason that doesn't involve the car driver not deserving a drivers license to not let motorcyclists do this.
On the other side of the coin, of course there are instances where motorcyclists overdo it.. when the general traffic speed is too high or their relative speed is too high (going fast is okay, but relative speeds are always very important). Or in actual cities where they just HAVE to be in front of you at the traffic light. If I'm in front of the queue, you can be damned sure I'll floor it, and I assure you my car is very fast. If you filter in f
Taken completely by surprise by your comment about Brontosaurus not being a proper name for a Brontosaurus (I somehow missed this) I decided to invoke the evil (Google) and look it up. I have decided your shaking your fist in fury is completely justified and I shall join you in this endeavour. Other amazing discoveries include that such beasts as pterodactyls are by definition (formally) not dinosaurs. Coupled with all the tech science and space mags I read today, this was an informative day!
I never thought I'd say this about a post, but seeing as your score is 0 ... :
MOD PARENT UP!
Dang, I read about this a week ago waiting for an appointment, skimming through the paper they had lying around. It was an interview with the inventor, but for the life of me I can't remember what the watch was called. Be damned forgetful mind! It's a good solution though, and I think for young children as well ... what could possibly go wrong?
Older children too even, but then you'd need to implement a system like the GPS being in the phone and you not being able to look at the location until you've tried calling at least twice (and not being answered).
It is a good quote :) About the translation thing though, I've noticed these 'expert translators' are not often very good. They know their languages well, of course, but often not the technology. Finding a pro translator that does know both is hard and very expensive. The volunteers are often enthousiasts who do know both the language and the software/technobabble needed. While it may not always be apparent for simple products (in terms of technobabble involved), niche tech apps can quickly run into this problem. I've seen very good volunteer translation work and very bad professional ... even at closed-source commercial corps.
"What if you had a personal Wi-Fi bubble, a private hot spot, that followed you everywhere you go? Incredibly, there is such a thing."
Yeah, it's called a phone!
If you have a Windows Mobile phone with an internet plan, you could use WMWifiRouter(the most advanced of the pack), which has been available since 2007, and was the very first app to do this.
If you have a Symbian phone, you could use JoikuSpot, which has been available since 2008.
To continue, for iPhone you could use PDANet. For Android there are also several programs available as well!
Why would you use something like this and get another data subscription when all you need is already in your pocket? Aside from the internet plan which you are likely to have already, all of these software are available for a small one-time fee - likely lower than one month of the data package itself.
Funny thing, none of those apps ever made it out of the firehose when I posted them. What makes this (very expensive and limited) product so special?