Re:I Guess I Don't Exist Then ...
on
Why Wave Failed
·
· Score: 1
If it cost money I would hate it. But since it's open source and free I kind of view it as a solution to a problem I don't have
Well - that's rather the essence of the problem, isn't it? It was a solution to a problem that nobody had.
(Not sure how it got posted to the front page via this blog post though, instead of the actual source -- sometimes blogs have insightful commentary to add. This one - submitted by author - seems to be an attempt to drive up traffic.)
As an indie BB developer, I've mixed impressions here. The changes to OS6 look very promising (I'll be digging in more tonight since they released the SDK today, but so far they look good -- and this on top of a platform that was pretty solid to begin with, even if not the flashiest out there.) There are also some cool features - like gesture support on the trackpad, integrated search, etc - which I'm looking forward to playing with.
A lot of things I've had to manually code workarounds for are now part of the OS. This is a two-edged sword though: I still need to support older platforms (thus must keep my legacy code); yet also want to have the more efficient/integrated advantage that comes with using native APIs. It's not *too* painful as I've already determined handling for this scenario in previous OS versions (5.0, 4.7, 4.6, 4.5, 4.3...)... but it is frustrating as some of these things really should have been there all along. (On the other hand: this isn't a problem specific to BB. -- it's a problem with developing against any platform that undergoes significant improvements over time.)
I was looking forward to the Torch hardware itself - since my first BB (8700c) I was thinking it would be really cool if they found a way to merge their keyboard with the Palm touchscreens. When I heard about it, I had geekgasms. Now that I'm seeing the specs... my reaction is mixed. I'm seeing a lot of feedback about the relatively slow processor (compared to other smartphones); but realistically I don't anticipate that to have much effect. My experience with BB has shown that Well written apps will run well; poorly written apps will run poorly; but the core OS will remain snappy. As long as that doesn't change, I'm not too concerned about the CPU speed. (the only exception was the 8800 - that thing was dog-slow... don't know what they were thinking.) Even the RAM doesn't bother me - though I am still h oping we'll see the ability to run apps off of SD card or at least on-board flash. Either of these would make RAM an absolute non-issue.
What disappoints me is the screen resolution: this device has the same resolution as my 9700-- which has a much smaller screen. I really expected this to get bumped up a notch in this release, and the fact that it hasn't has me debating whether i want to get the Torch, or wait for the Flaming Torch or whatever the next version of the hardware will be. Considering how long I've been wanting exactly this device, the idea of waiting for a next rev is irksome.
Overall: the OS looks good. The API improvements make a solid system even better. The new tools for web-based apps look very promising, and a vast improvement over their previous iteration. The hardware is "meh", but still a step up; I only wish the screen were better resolution. The fact that they're now including app store with the OS itself is also a huge improvement: too many people think that the crapware links that AT&T/whoever pushes to the phone are the extent of the BB app selection, and that's not the case. Hopefully this push (along with their planned marketing) will make both developers and consumers more aware that BB is a good platform for apps.
Streisand effect usually refers to specific information that someone wants to keep hidden/keep from becoming widely known. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure that people knew about the FBI seal before the FBI demanded it be taken off the page.
Let's not forget the system that allows Intuit et al to bribe... erm, make multi-million dollar campaign contributions in order to effect laws that are uniquely favorable to themselves (or prevent laws that are not favorable). I'm generally pretty fond of my country and system of government -- but this one has bugged me for years.
Also not trolling - but not as necessary as you'd think. Not that C# isn't relevant -- it is -- but in reality, Java has a broader market and a larger installed base. This is doubly so in the enterprise space, where C# has made some inroads but just doesn't have the penetration. Additionally, most popular mobile platforms (Android, J2ME [supported by nearly every phone except iphone], and BlackBerry) use Java as their language of choice.
A quick search of several popular job boards shows that Java postings outnumber C# from 2:1 to 7:1 depending on the board. C# is definitely useful (particularly for client development IMO), but it's not where the demand currently is. If you had to pick one to focus on, I'd go for the one with better job prospects.
And of course....language aside, most critical is learning the concepts of OO programming over any one particular framework.
Sheesh! Why sue? That's not the answer to everything unless you're looking for a way to make some cash, or living in a litigation-crazy country like the USA.
You do know that it's possible -- sometimes even necessary -- to sue for remedies other than cash, don't you? These remedies include (but are not limited to) enforcing or nullifying contract or license terms. But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of your prejudices...
Because those are the very places that real black-hats would target, so those are the ones with the measures in place to intercept attempts at social-engineering exploits.
I work at one of those places, and I gotta say... those "measures" aren't as stringent as I'd like them to be. That is to say - we get employee training (CBT) once a year to refresh our knowledge of various procedures, and it touches briefly on social engineering (a single slide).
Now - I'm in the IS department, so it may be that those in lending ops, etc have a different story. For us the "measures" in place rely solely on the common sense of each employee.
No, no, and no. Non-technical people shouldn't try to learn programming.
"Nontechnical people — for example marketers or small business owners — increasingly get the feeling they should know more about technology. And they're right. If you can throw up a small website or do some real number-crunching, chances are those skills will help you feed your family.
No, they're not right. If the best you can do is throw up a small web site, then it will look like something you've... well, thrown up. There's a reason that there are people who make a good living at this sort of thing -- that's because they keep your non-technical ass out of places it doesn't belong.
If someone self-identifies as non-technical,a nd is learning this profession because they want the money or they feel they have to - I don't want them near me. They almost all write crap code and have no ability to think logically (in the comps sci sense, not in the philosophic sense). You have only to look at the millions of comp-sci grads coming in from India; and those who got into comp-sci here in the States for the money back int he 90s and early 00s. Perfectly intelligent people who can't code their way out of a wet paper bag, and who lack the critical thinking skills to understand that copy and paste is not "reuse".
"r. 'It is job one urgency around here. Nobody is sleeping at the switch. And so we are working with those partners, not just to deliver something, but to deliver products that people really want to go buy.'"
If nobody were sleeping at the switch, MS would have had its answer out before or at the same time as the iPad. The fact that they have to scurry to catch up indicates strongly that they were completely blindsided.
Extremely obvious? I'm not seeing it.
"You list the permissions your app needs in the AndroidManifest.xml file. They're not computed by what the app does in code.".
I tend to think making assumptions from fairly broad statements is a good way to get into trouble. If a permission is not computed by usage, then what in that statement would make me think a runtime check is performed? It could just as easily mean that permissions are opt-in. This would be a stupid way to do things (that's why I asked for clarification as it seemed unlikely to be correct), but there's nothing in his statement that says it goes one way or the other.
As all analogies must, that one begins to fall apart there -- 230 of the Communications Decency Act ensures that forum owners are not generally liable for the content posted by participants.
What's more impressive is that many people were happy to stump up $10 for a 100k text file
What's more impressive is that people don't understand that you are paying for the author's effort in writing the book and for the publisher's effort in marketing the book, not for the number of bits involved. Is your favorite paper book equally valuable to you as the same amount of blank paper?
Clearly the blank paper is more valuable -- for you can copy it without fear of reprisal!
OP made it sound as if it relied solely on the developer adding the right permissions to the manifest and neglected to mention that Android would disallow actions not in the manifest.
I'm not familiar with the Android platform, but that seems like a really bad idea. "OF course you'll be honest with what your app does, Mr Malwharightar, you just go ahead and tell us what permissions you need."
Are you 100% sure this is the case? I can't picture Google (or any competent team) making an error that fundamental in the platform design. The BB platform looks at the actions you take in code; I would expect Android to do no less.
Removing the application shouldn't be necessary. In the same way a/. comment will get modded into oblivion, the app will lose all credibility.
There comes a point where you must expect users to be responsible for themselves. The OS already does what it should: it provides granular permission controls and allows the user to decide what to allow. (I daresay BB OS does it one step better, in that it allows the app to include detailed explanations with the prompts. Though Android's UI for it is better... )
Whether the user chooses to blindly accept that; or whether they actually question why a wallpaper app needs access to their phone books should absolutely be up to the user.
The only thing you can put on top of the controls already in place are the standards you mentioned -- but those standards require people to sit down and review the code of every app coming in the door.
I think comparing this to/. comments is a good analogy though not in the direction you intended: anyone can submit anything and it is published. Only after the comment is published does it get reviewed for behavior (community etiquette/standards); if it fails that test it gets hidden from view -- though not deleted if you want to see it anyway.
Apps today already have stringent requirements: the OS will not allow them to do anything that the user says is bad. Trying to add additional review requirements on top of that will only slow down the process for the vast majority of legitimate developers; and punish those few people who are willing to take responsibility for themselves when installing applications to their devices.
Slashdot Mirror
If it cost money I would hate it. But since it's open source and free I kind of view it as a solution to a problem I don't have
Well - that's rather the essence of the problem, isn't it? It was a solution to a problem that nobody had.
(Not sure how it got posted to the front page via this blog post though, instead of the actual source -- sometimes blogs have insightful commentary to add. This one - submitted by author - seems to be an attempt to drive up traffic.)
As an indie BB developer, I've mixed impressions here. The changes to OS6 look very promising (I'll be digging in more tonight since they released the SDK today, but so far they look good -- and this on top of a platform that was pretty solid to begin with, even if not the flashiest out there.) There are also some cool features - like gesture support on the trackpad, integrated search, etc - which I'm looking forward to playing with.
A lot of things I've had to manually code workarounds for are now part of the OS. This is a two-edged sword though: I still need to support older platforms (thus must keep my legacy code); yet also want to have the more efficient/integrated advantage that comes with using native APIs. It's not *too* painful as I've already determined handling for this scenario in previous OS versions (5.0, 4.7, 4.6, 4.5, 4.3...) ... but it is frustrating as some of these things really should have been there all along. (On the other hand: this isn't a problem specific to BB. -- it's a problem with developing against any platform that undergoes significant improvements over time.)
I was looking forward to the Torch hardware itself - since my first BB (8700c) I was thinking it would be really cool if they found a way to merge their keyboard with the Palm touchscreens. When I heard about it, I had geekgasms. Now that I'm seeing the specs... my reaction is mixed. I'm seeing a lot of feedback about the relatively slow processor (compared to other smartphones); but realistically I don't anticipate that to have much effect. My experience with BB has shown that Well written apps will run well; poorly written apps will run poorly; but the core OS will remain snappy. As long as that doesn't change, I'm not too concerned about the CPU speed. (the only exception was the 8800 - that thing was dog-slow... don't know what they were thinking.) Even the RAM doesn't bother me - though I am still h oping we'll see the ability to run apps off of SD card or at least on-board flash. Either of these would make RAM an absolute non-issue.
What disappoints me is the screen resolution: this device has the same resolution as my 9700-- which has a much smaller screen. I really expected this to get bumped up a notch in this release, and the fact that it hasn't has me debating whether i want to get the Torch, or wait for the Flaming Torch or whatever the next version of the hardware will be. Considering how long I've been wanting exactly this device, the idea of waiting for a next rev is irksome.
Overall: the OS looks good. The API improvements make a solid system even better. The new tools for web-based apps look very promising, and a vast improvement over their previous iteration. The hardware is "meh", but still a step up; I only wish the screen were better resolution. The fact that they're now including app store with the OS itself is also a huge improvement: too many people think that the crapware links that AT&T/whoever pushes to the phone are the extent of the BB app selection, and that's not the case. Hopefully this push (along with their planned marketing) will make both developers and consumers more aware that BB is a good platform for apps.
Streisand effect usually refers to specific information that someone wants to keep hidden/keep from becoming widely known. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure that people knew about the FBI seal before the FBI demanded it be taken off the page.
Oh come on! Do you really think anyone would ever have heard of the FBI seal if they hadn't threatened Wikipedia?
Ya, you got me with that one. My bad.
But what happens when it exceeds 100%? That's what I want to know.
This dial goes up to 11.
Streisand in 3... 2...
I think that word doesn't mean what you think it means.
does not cause injury to the US.
No, but it sure can cause injuries to the US's soldiers and those aiding them. I suppose that's a secondary consideration though...
After that experience, I'm actually not so sure that I do want to use their software.
Whoo-boy. Way to make a firm decision and stand by it! Perhaps after the next experience, you'll almost decide that Quicken just isn't for you.
Let's not forget the system that allows Intuit et al to bribe... erm, make multi-million dollar campaign contributions in order to effect laws that are uniquely favorable to themselves (or prevent laws that are not favorable). I'm generally pretty fond of my country and system of government -- but this one has bugged me for years.
Indeed - as is proven repeatedly by the many states that do have a simple percentage-based tax.
A quick search of several popular job boards shows that Java postings outnumber C# from 2:1 to 7:1 depending on the board. C# is definitely useful (particularly for client development IMO), but it's not where the demand currently is. If you had to pick one to focus on, I'd go for the one with better job prospects.
And of course... .language aside, most critical is learning the concepts of OO programming over any one particular framework.
Sheesh! Why sue? That's not the answer to everything unless you're looking for a way to make some cash, or living in a litigation-crazy country like the USA.
You do know that it's possible -- sometimes even necessary -- to sue for remedies other than cash, don't you? These remedies include (but are not limited to) enforcing or nullifying contract or license terms. But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of your prejudices...
The better question is "who cares?" In what possible way does this bit of information make a difference to any of our lives.
Because those are the very places that real black-hats would target, so those are the ones with the measures in place to intercept attempts at social-engineering exploits.
I work at one of those places, and I gotta say... those "measures" aren't as stringent as I'd like them to be. That is to say - we get employee training (CBT) once a year to refresh our knowledge of various procedures, and it touches briefly on social engineering (a single slide).
Now - I'm in the IS department, so it may be that those in lending ops, etc have a different story. For us the "measures" in place rely solely on the common sense of each employee.
Scary, isn't it?
"Nontechnical people — for example marketers or small business owners — increasingly get the feeling they should know more about technology. And they're right. If you can throw up a small website or do some real number-crunching, chances are those skills will help you feed your family.
No, they're not right. If the best you can do is throw up a small web site, then it will look like something you've... well, thrown up. There's a reason that there are people who make a good living at this sort of thing -- that's because they keep your non-technical ass out of places it doesn't belong.
If someone self-identifies as non-technical,a nd is learning this profession because they want the money or they feel they have to - I don't want them near me. They almost all write crap code and have no ability to think logically (in the comps sci sense, not in the philosophic sense). You have only to look at the millions of comp-sci grads coming in from India; and those who got into comp-sci here in the States for the money back int he 90s and early 00s. Perfectly intelligent people who can't code their way out of a wet paper bag, and who lack the critical thinking skills to understand that copy and paste is not "reuse".
Now get off my lawn.
If you frequently make assumptions that broad, I hope you don't do anything that involves code or end-users ;)
"r. 'It is job one urgency around here. Nobody is sleeping at the switch. And so we are working with those partners, not just to deliver something, but to deliver products that people really want to go buy.'"
If nobody were sleeping at the switch, MS would have had its answer out before or at the same time as the iPad. The fact that they have to scurry to catch up indicates strongly that they were completely blindsided.
I tend to think making assumptions from fairly broad statements is a good way to get into trouble. If a permission is not computed by usage, then what in that statement would make me think a runtime check is performed? It could just as easily mean that permissions are opt-in. This would be a stupid way to do things (that's why I asked for clarification as it seemed unlikely to be correct), but there's nothing in his statement that says it goes one way or the other.
As all analogies must, that one begins to fall apart there -- 230 of the Communications Decency Act ensures that forum owners are not generally liable for the content posted by participants.
Thanks for that insightful and yet meaningless contribution.
What's more impressive is that many people were happy to stump up $10 for a 100k text file What's more impressive is that people don't understand that you are paying for the author's effort in writing the book and for the publisher's effort in marketing the book, not for the number of bits involved. Is your favorite paper book equally valuable to you as the same amount of blank paper?
Clearly the blank paper is more valuable -- for you can copy it without fear of reprisal!
OP made it sound as if it relied solely on the developer adding the right permissions to the manifest and neglected to mention that Android would disallow actions not in the manifest.
Ah, ok. That's a rather key piece of information left out by Drathus's comment which indicated that the XML was the ONLY indicator of permissions.
Are you 100% sure this is the case? I can't picture Google (or any competent team) making an error that fundamental in the platform design. The BB platform looks at the actions you take in code; I would expect Android to do no less.
There comes a point where you must expect users to be responsible for themselves. The OS already does what it should: it provides granular permission controls and allows the user to decide what to allow. (I daresay BB OS does it one step better, in that it allows the app to include detailed explanations with the prompts. Though Android's UI for it is better... )
Whether the user chooses to blindly accept that; or whether they actually question why a wallpaper app needs access to their phone books should absolutely be up to the user.
The only thing you can put on top of the controls already in place are the standards you mentioned -- but those standards require people to sit down and review the code of every app coming in the door.
I think comparing this to /. comments is a good analogy though not in the direction you intended: anyone can submit anything and it is published. Only after the comment is published does it get reviewed for behavior (community etiquette/standards); if it fails that test it gets hidden from view -- though not deleted if you want to see it anyway.
Apps today already have stringent requirements: the OS will not allow them to do anything that the user says is bad. Trying to add additional review requirements on top of that will only slow down the process for the vast majority of legitimate developers; and punish those few people who are willing to take responsibility for themselves when installing applications to their devices.