Re:search terms = microsoft digia
on
Nokia Sells Qt
·
· Score: 1
yo AC, but if or when they go too far into bed with MS, they must give up non-MS projects or they lose stuff from MS. Digia looks like they are willing to go all the way with MS and that does not do Qt any good.
seriously, this isn't a Microserf doing marketing? And I thought that WP7 didn't allow C/C++ and was some form of MS.NET language and runtime. And aren't all the UI's "custom" UIs for these phones or are you somehow using a COTS UI? lol And FYI, Android is not Java but uses the Java language and pointing to previous/. stories about Java performance? really?
This really sounds like a lame marketing post from a Microsoft employee. just saying.
MS bought the distribution channels Nokia has worldwide for $1 billion and that's about it. Well, the also stopped them from adding to the Android market so that's something but from what we've seen, they've not done too well selling good hardware and probably were not going to pull off what Motorola has done. So what does the distribution channels get Microsoft? Instant distribution of WP7 when Nokia builds a phone with it installed. It also gives Microsoft sales drones who they can grease their palms with MS funny money to do anything it takes to push WP7 phones above all the others. Almost every phone store out there sells some Nokia phones in the lineup. So we'll see if the sales drones can force people away from the iPhones and Android phones and give MS some market share. If anything, MS can flood the channels, tell the press how many millions of units have shipped( not sold but shipped ) and fake people into thinking others are buying WP7 so they should too.
and this time they've only bought up a company with the most product distribution contracts but dwindling sales and with little else going for it. WP7 does not magically change Nokia. So what it looks like is that Microsoft paid $1 billion to keep Nokia from adding to the Android fleet and gets its hands on their distribution channels. This means that Microsoft will by paying many billions of dollars more to flood these distribution channels with Nokia WP7 devices and the marketing deals to have sales personnel push those over iPhones and Android devices. This will probably end up costing Microsoft over $5 billion, remain at about 10% market share and the end of Nokia. IMO
LoB
Re:search terms = microsoft digia
on
Nokia Sells Qt
·
· Score: 2
I knew a guy who ran a small consulting biz and once he signed to be a Microsoft "Partner" he could not accept contracts using competing tools. So when I see so many tags showing a Digia & Microsoft Partner program membership, it stands to reason they will not do good things with the cross platform Qt. Cross platform anything has always put a bullseye on it for Microsoft to aim at and take out. It started in the early 90s with cross platform C++ frameworks, moved to 3D OpenGL and kept going from there. Look at Borland, they were a dev tools company and that was about it but they were cross platform and court docs showed they were targeted because of that. Borland won in court but they're gone.
Trusting Microsoft and Nokia in this is inconsistent with history. A very long history. Qt commercial is going to be killed off and Digia was given a sweet deal to be the ones to do it. If they're public, watch their financials over the next few quarters. IMO
LoB
search terms = microsoft digia
on
Nokia Sells Qt
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
the results show Digia as a big Microsoft fan, supporter, customer, partner.
Watch Qt licensing and support fees to skyrocket to drive Qt out of the market. Nokia won't be implicated but that is probably the plan. Anything cross platform has _always_ been a threat to Microsoft and they have done everything legal and many time illegal to destroy these. Qt is a threat to Microsoft and destroying Qt also helps them hurt companies like Google and Adobe who base many of their tools and products on Qt. IMO
I figured this would happen but hoped it wouldn't. it sucks.
this is a former Microsoft exec, now CEO of Nokia, handing Nokia over to Microsoft as a phone asset. If you don't think so, read his speech of the deal and specifically the part on why Google was not an option. The stuff about Google being a threat to them was 100% Microsoft type fear and should have had nothing to do with Nokia.
I'm happy to see they are not killing it outright but time will tell if the new owner isn't also a Microsoft "friend" and pulls the plug or does something effectively the same, ie moving the IDE into MS Visual Studio.
they have to do it with MS.NET or some other cross-Windows compatibility layer. How do they do that you might ask. They would do it with a Microsoft MarketPlace where you purchase and download your applications and it's all controlled by Microsoft. They do it by restricting how you install your applications so there is no expectation that a CD with ProgX for Windows XP, Vista, 7 can be installed because there's no CD slot.
The tablet market is the perfect transition to a more controlled Microsoft Windows application market and more adoption of the MS.NET SDK. You won't see standard looking PCs running ARM and Windows, nor will you see laptops doing it. Windows 8 for ARM will be for Tablets and possibly phones and only if it has success will we see anything close to standard x86 PC hardware. IMO
The thing about PREP and CHRP was that they provided open firmware and were designed to run different operating systems. You know darn well that any ARM hardware that'll be designed to run Windows 8 will not support any of the open firmware currently in use. It could be a step closer to the end of cheap open hardware for Linux fans.
But one must consider that these Microsoft partners will also be locking the hardware to Windows and therefore it'll be a closed platform. The x86 platform as it has existed resulted in many different OSs running on it and we can purchase bare bones white boxes and put the OS of our choice on them. I don't think that will play forward if/when we see OEMs doing ARM boxes for the next version of Windows.
The last hope of an open RISC platform was back in the mid `90s when the PowerPC platforms were getting tossed around.That one failed when Apple backed out of the first design and it took 2-3 years for the next and they pulled the plug on that too. It would be nice to see another open hardware platform but I would not expect to see Microsoft allow it. They know darn well how much of a pain it's been that Linux runs on standard x86 boxes out of the box.
as long as your DOS apps didn't use the print.com program. IIRC, that went missing in one of the Win9x versions. I know this because I did a migration of a business app and printing stopped working until I brought print.com in from a previous version of DOS. It may have survived an update and this was a new installation of Win9x and its DOS didn't have the required print.com program. It was yet another thing that pissed me off at how poorly they handled the migration. Many times I had to deal with DOS apps which didn't work or took lots of config.sys mods where they worked great in IBM OS/2.
that's right, this is a training position at Microsoft as they pull open source skilled management types into Microsoft to help them work to fight off open source options. Nobody should EVER think that an open source skilled person inside of Microsoft will help open source projects. It's all about Microsoft software being used _instead_ of open source. Interoperability means this too.
that should be obvious since every time someone is hired to be an interface to open source inside of Microsoft they get moved into anti-open source positions after a year or two of re-education. Microsoft has to spend billions annually to fight customers moving to open source solutions so "working with open source" means learning how to spend less keeping or moving customers back to Microsoft software. Remember how all that Novell stuff was about working with open source? What did that turn out to be?
Yes, it's a trap. The real question is why isn't this obvious after so many attempts by Microsoft to "work with open source"?
today you have freshmeat, sourceforge, etc for developers and many times you've got a tarball to get and compile but little in the way of descriptions of what it's details are, tricks/techniques etc. So how about an Openpedia which would include screenshots, descriptions of what it does and user comments for tips/tricks along with links to packages with the requirement of atleast RPM and DEB packages or it can't be listed( no tarballs ).
And lots of search capabilities so you can find a category of projects to pick from.
keep in mind that these newer designs are also using newer production processes and that means smaller die and less power. Initially, many of the Cortex a8 CPUs were coming off 65nm processes and running under 1GHz. Then came 45nm and we saw 1GHz and higher speeds. The Cortex a9 on 45nm brought another core and lots more performance but not much power savings. I've not seen the process specs yet for these newer CPUs but I've seen ARM had been working to release designs for as small as 28nm and there's 40nm and IIRC 32nm in between. More cores does add complexity and power hungry circuits but advances in process reduce overall power from generation to generation.
Also remember that Intel has only been able to play in this space by outpacing ARM vendors with their advanced processes. While low power ARM CPUs were being produced on 65nm Intel was showing off their Atom on 45nm yet they still ate many more watts than the ARM chips. When ARM vendors moved to 45nm then Intel moved Atom to 32nm. Tough one for Intel to be using it's most advanced process production lines for low cost parts to try and compete with ARM.
I'm with you on the concern that performance racing might end up with really poor battery life. I was sickened years ago when laptops were getting 2+ hours of battery life without fans and then Intel and Microsoft loaded the system so badly they needed fans and still got around the same battery life. Netbooks got hit with similar effects once Windows was forced onto the devices and caused the hardware requirements to be raised higher to accommodate the OS. I don't think Windows on ARM will do the segment any good and could harm as vendors will need to vastly boost hardware to support it.
they maybe didn't run OS/2 on everything but did run SOM( System Object Model ) applications on AIX and possibly others. They were trying to find a common application layer and they were moving to SOM and toward OpenDOC when Java took the industry by storm. They also shipped a PC running OS/2 with some of their mainframes from what I heard since it was the control or console admin device.
the all out acceptance of Windows NT at DEC is IMO what contributed to their quick downfall. Remember, HP almost fell for the same thing and was on the path to push all their HPUX customers to Windows NT based systems when they stopped it. DEC was enamored with Windows NT and many of their customers were pushed and marketed to regarding how great NT was. DEC had great high-end hardware and even their lower end stuff looked well engineered but cheaper boxes from other vendors kept the sales from happening.
So you might want to think that the ties between DEC and Microsoft Windows is a warm fuzzy memory but it really isn't.
or Wile E. Coyote tries to "fly" over a tree branch and then gets wrapped around it in every decreasing circles before sudden and final deceleration occurs.
And don't forget flying over the water falls, realizing the error, looks down and sees the boat falling fast, hose stretching and stretching, and then yeowwwwwwww!
with this rig and a remote control in the victim^h^h^h^h^h^hthrill seekers hands he or she can feel like they are flying. For an accessory, change out that cable for a bungee cord and really have some fun. Get your friends to try it and don't tell them you have the extra over-ride remote and slap them into the water a few time for great youtube video fun.
I doubt it would be the money but the sunlight readable display is probably the most important feature they seem to be glossing over. A PixelQi display based tablet would be better since they could do video nicely also. And you know there'll be a Madden app so the coaches can draw X's and O's live all over the display. It's about time really. Tablets are not new tech and they could have been using larger and heavier Windows based tablets for years if they really cared to. IMO
maybe the marketing releases are where you heard that BING gives more relevant results.
I looked at BING when it first came out and when I noticed that out a few pages they were showing some of the same links as what was shown on earlier pages, it was obvious it was just another Microsoft product out to use marketing tricks instead of winning my being better. Sounds like MS BING still sucks. No surprise here. IMO
don't forget, you get to decide when to migrate when you use an open source product and you can pick the vendors or even hire one contract developer to help keep it running. Get on a Microsoft contract and when it's up, you see a hammer over your head labelled "Stay with version X" and you see the big "$" sign over the Microsoft licensing partner saying "Get your new version here and BTW, move everyone to it".
That's one of the things I see wrong with various proprietary software and software projects. The part about supporting open standards for migration options is another but how the vendors get you on the upgrade threadmill is the biggie. IMO
Slashdot Mirror
yo AC, but if or when they go too far into bed with MS, they must give up non-MS projects or they lose stuff from MS. Digia looks like they are willing to go all the way with MS and that does not do Qt any good.
LoB
seriously, this isn't a Microserf doing marketing? And I thought that WP7 didn't allow C/C++ and was some form of MS .NET language and runtime. And aren't all the UI's "custom" UIs for these phones or are you somehow using a COTS UI? lol And FYI, Android is not Java but uses the Java language and pointing to previous /. stories about Java performance? really?
This really sounds like a lame marketing post from a Microsoft employee. just saying.
LoB
MS bought the distribution channels Nokia has worldwide for $1 billion and that's about it. Well, the also stopped them from adding to the Android market so that's something but from what we've seen, they've not done too well selling good hardware and probably were not going to pull off what Motorola has done. So what does the distribution channels get Microsoft? Instant distribution of WP7 when Nokia builds a phone with it installed. It also gives Microsoft sales drones who they can grease their palms with MS funny money to do anything it takes to push WP7 phones above all the others. Almost every phone store out there sells some Nokia phones in the lineup. So we'll see if the sales drones can force people away from the iPhones and Android phones and give MS some market share. If anything, MS can flood the channels, tell the press how many millions of units have shipped( not sold but shipped ) and fake people into thinking others are buying WP7 so they should too.
LoB
and this time they've only bought up a company with the most product distribution contracts but dwindling sales and with little else going for it. WP7 does not magically change Nokia. So what it looks like is that Microsoft paid $1 billion to keep Nokia from adding to the Android fleet and gets its hands on their distribution channels. This means that Microsoft will by paying many billions of dollars more to flood these distribution channels with Nokia WP7 devices and the marketing deals to have sales personnel push those over iPhones and Android devices. This will probably end up costing Microsoft over $5 billion, remain at about 10% market share and the end of Nokia. IMO
LoB
I knew a guy who ran a small consulting biz and once he signed to be a Microsoft "Partner" he could not accept contracts using competing tools. So when I see so many tags showing a Digia & Microsoft Partner program membership, it stands to reason they will not do good things with the cross platform Qt. Cross platform anything has always put a bullseye on it for Microsoft to aim at and take out. It started in the early 90s with cross platform C++ frameworks, moved to 3D OpenGL and kept going from there. Look at Borland, they were a dev tools company and that was about it but they were cross platform and court docs showed they were targeted because of that. Borland won in court but they're gone.
Trusting Microsoft and Nokia in this is inconsistent with history. A very long history. Qt commercial is going to be killed off and Digia was given a sweet deal to be the ones to do it. If they're public, watch their financials over the next few quarters. IMO
LoB
the results show Digia as a big Microsoft fan, supporter, customer, partner.
Watch Qt licensing and support fees to skyrocket to drive Qt out of the market. Nokia won't be implicated but that is probably the plan. Anything cross platform has _always_ been a threat to Microsoft and they have done everything legal and many time illegal to destroy these. Qt is a threat to Microsoft and destroying Qt also helps them hurt companies like Google and Adobe who base many of their tools and products on Qt. IMO
I figured this would happen but hoped it wouldn't. it sucks.
LoB
this is a former Microsoft exec, now CEO of Nokia, handing Nokia over to Microsoft as a phone asset. If you don't think so, read his speech of the deal and specifically the part on why Google was not an option. The stuff about Google being a threat to them was 100% Microsoft type fear and should have had nothing to do with Nokia.
I'm happy to see they are not killing it outright but time will tell if the new owner isn't also a Microsoft "friend" and pulls the plug or does something effectively the same, ie moving the IDE into MS Visual Studio.
LoB
they have to do it with MS .NET or some other cross-Windows compatibility layer. How do they do that you might ask. They would do it with a Microsoft MarketPlace where you purchase and download your applications and it's all controlled by Microsoft. They do it by restricting how you install your applications so there is no expectation that a CD with ProgX for Windows XP, Vista, 7 can be installed because there's no CD slot.
.NET SDK. You won't see standard looking PCs running ARM and Windows, nor will you see laptops doing it. Windows 8 for ARM will be for Tablets and possibly phones and only if it has success will we see anything close to standard x86 PC hardware. IMO
The tablet market is the perfect transition to a more controlled Microsoft Windows application market and more adoption of the MS
LoB
The thing about PREP and CHRP was that they provided open firmware and were designed to run different operating systems. You know darn well that any ARM hardware that'll be designed to run Windows 8 will not support any of the open firmware currently in use. It could be a step closer to the end of cheap open hardware for Linux fans.
LoB
But one must consider that these Microsoft partners will also be locking the hardware to Windows and therefore it'll be a closed platform. The x86 platform as it has existed resulted in many different OSs running on it and we can purchase bare bones white boxes and put the OS of our choice on them. I don't think that will play forward if/when we see OEMs doing ARM boxes for the next version of Windows.
The last hope of an open RISC platform was back in the mid `90s when the PowerPC platforms were getting tossed around.That one failed when Apple backed out of the first design and it took 2-3 years for the next and they pulled the plug on that too. It would be nice to see another open hardware platform but I would not expect to see Microsoft allow it. They know darn well how much of a pain it's been that Linux runs on standard x86 boxes out of the box.
LoB
as long as your DOS apps didn't use the print.com program. IIRC, that went missing in one of the Win9x versions. I know this because I did a migration of a business app and printing stopped working until I brought print.com in from a previous version of DOS. It may have survived an update and this was a new installation of Win9x and its DOS didn't have the required print.com program. It was yet another thing that pissed me off at how poorly they handled the migration. Many times I had to deal with DOS apps which didn't work or took lots of config.sys mods where they worked great in IBM OS/2.
LoB
that's right, this is a training position at Microsoft as they pull open source skilled management types into Microsoft to help them work to fight off open source options. Nobody should EVER think that an open source skilled person inside of Microsoft will help open source projects. It's all about Microsoft software being used _instead_ of open source. Interoperability means this too.
LoB
yes, flying MS-Monkeys. Again.
LoB
that should be obvious since every time someone is hired to be an interface to open source inside of Microsoft they get moved into anti-open source positions after a year or two of re-education. Microsoft has to spend billions annually to fight customers moving to open source solutions so "working with open source" means learning how to spend less keeping or moving customers back to Microsoft software. Remember how all that Novell stuff was about working with open source? What did that turn out to be?
Yes, it's a trap. The real question is why isn't this obvious after so many attempts by Microsoft to "work with open source"?
LoB
today you have freshmeat, sourceforge, etc for developers and many times you've got a tarball to get and compile but little in the way of descriptions of what it's details are, tricks/techniques etc. So how about an Openpedia which would include screenshots, descriptions of what it does and user comments for tips/tricks along with links to packages with the requirement of atleast RPM and DEB packages or it can't be listed( no tarballs ).
And lots of search capabilities so you can find a category of projects to pick from.
LoB
keep in mind that these newer designs are also using newer production processes and that means smaller die and less power. Initially, many of the Cortex a8 CPUs were coming off 65nm processes and running under 1GHz. Then came 45nm and we saw 1GHz and higher speeds. The Cortex a9 on 45nm brought another core and lots more performance but not much power savings. I've not seen the process specs yet for these newer CPUs but I've seen ARM had been working to release designs for as small as 28nm and there's 40nm and IIRC 32nm in between. More cores does add complexity and power hungry circuits but advances in process reduce overall power from generation to generation.
Also remember that Intel has only been able to play in this space by outpacing ARM vendors with their advanced processes. While low power ARM CPUs were being produced on 65nm Intel was showing off their Atom on 45nm yet they still ate many more watts than the ARM chips. When ARM vendors moved to 45nm then Intel moved Atom to 32nm. Tough one for Intel to be using it's most advanced process production lines for low cost parts to try and compete with ARM.
I'm with you on the concern that performance racing might end up with really poor battery life. I was sickened years ago when laptops were getting 2+ hours of battery life without fans and then Intel and Microsoft loaded the system so badly they needed fans and still got around the same battery life. Netbooks got hit with similar effects once Windows was forced onto the devices and caused the hardware requirements to be raised higher to accommodate the OS. I don't think Windows on ARM will do the segment any good and could harm as vendors will need to vastly boost hardware to support it.
LoB
it'll probably hit the fan right around the time GM kills the 2nd electric car.
LoB
they maybe didn't run OS/2 on everything but did run SOM( System Object Model ) applications on AIX and possibly others. They were trying to find a common application layer and they were moving to SOM and toward OpenDOC when Java took the industry by storm. They also shipped a PC running OS/2 with some of their mainframes from what I heard since it was the control or console admin device.
LoB
the all out acceptance of Windows NT at DEC is IMO what contributed to their quick downfall. Remember, HP almost fell for the same thing and was on the path to push all their HPUX customers to Windows NT based systems when they stopped it. DEC was enamored with Windows NT and many of their customers were pushed and marketed to regarding how great NT was. DEC had great high-end hardware and even their lower end stuff looked well engineered but cheaper boxes from other vendors kept the sales from happening.
So you might want to think that the ties between DEC and Microsoft Windows is a warm fuzzy memory but it really isn't.
LoB
Yes, it would be much more secure if nobody could see the display.
LoB
or Wile E. Coyote tries to "fly" over a tree branch and then gets wrapped around it in every decreasing circles before sudden and final deceleration occurs.
And don't forget flying over the water falls, realizing the error, looks down and sees the boat falling fast, hose stretching and stretching, and then yeowwwwwwww!
LoB
with this rig and a remote control in the victim^h^h^h^h^h^hthrill seekers hands he or she can feel like they are flying. For an accessory, change out that cable for a bungee cord and really have some fun. Get your friends to try it and don't tell them you have the extra over-ride remote and slap them into the water a few time for great youtube video fun.
LoB
I doubt it would be the money but the sunlight readable display is probably the most important feature they seem to be glossing over. A PixelQi display based tablet would be better since they could do video nicely also. And you know there'll be a Madden app so the coaches can draw X's and O's live all over the display. It's about time really. Tablets are not new tech and they could have been using larger and heavier Windows based tablets for years if they really cared to. IMO
LoB
maybe the marketing releases are where you heard that BING gives more relevant results.
I looked at BING when it first came out and when I noticed that out a few pages they were showing some of the same links as what was shown on earlier pages, it was obvious it was just another Microsoft product out to use marketing tricks instead of winning my being better. Sounds like MS BING still sucks. No surprise here. IMO
LoB
don't forget, you get to decide when to migrate when you use an open source product and you can pick the vendors or even hire one contract developer to help keep it running. Get on a Microsoft contract and when it's up, you see a hammer over your head labelled "Stay with version X" and you see the big "$" sign over the Microsoft licensing partner saying "Get your new version here and BTW, move everyone to it".
That's one of the things I see wrong with various proprietary software and software projects. The part about supporting open standards for migration options is another but how the vendors get you on the upgrade threadmill is the biggie. IMO
LoB