If you compare Android with any other mobile OS you'll see that Android is open, or at least as open as it gets. Now, the definition of open is obscure, so we both can claim whatever we'd like (for one thing open never means free). Google has the right to call their OS whatever they'd like, just as Apple has the right to claim whatever BS they want too (e.g. the Mac vs PC ads). If you say Google is wrong to call Android open, then Apple is wrong to call a lot of BS about iPhone.
Yes, a different UI must really be hard. The only people I find that complain about this are the same ones who need to write down a step by step list of actions to perform a task (those would be people who do not like to think, even a bit). My god, whatever will clicking or touching an icon do, or scrolling the screen with my finger in the direction of the scroll bar? While there are differences between UIs, the common concepts behind them are all the same. But shit, it takes effort to learn new things. It's as hard as it is for a monkey to peal a banana.
As far as the iPhone being the more innovative platform, I'd have to disagree. Because you see, you can't really be innovative with the iPhone. Remap the wrong keys and your app is history, regardless of how useful it might be. God forbid should we want to have something useful like a P2P app, or something that does not fit into Jobs moral guidelines. What is it that you can do with an iPhone or with iOS that you can't do with an Android, aside from being a douche.
Google is right about calling iPhone closed. Because it IS CLOSED. Jobs would like to bend the truth here. Does Apple give me the iOS sources, unfettered transfer of files and apps, control over the device I bought, free use wherever and however I like? NO! Hence, it's closed. Case closed, my dear Watson.
The primary reason why I decided not to use DirectX is because there is no DirectX on Linux, Mac or anything else that does not come with a Microsoft branded logo. Advantages or not, DirectX is a proprietary API which cannot be used on non Microsoft platform, other than by means of reverse-engineering it (a la WINE).
It's not like you had to board a ship, kill it's crew and rape the women, and then take the chest full of gold. Yeah, the author really had to walk the plank.
Here in Bosnia and Herzegovina you can get flat rate at our only ISP (HT Mostar) that provides ADSL (with fair use clause, which means it's not flat) internet access for over 40 euro with a 512/64 KBits/s connection (it's a mockery to call it broadband), with a 12 month contract minimum or you pay more. RIP-OFF.
Their advertisements and their behavior make me wanna puke.
I pay 20 for my 2048/256 KBit/s connection with 5 GiB monthly traffic. Seeing as there are 3 more people using the connection other than me, this is barely enough to have decent use of the internet. This means no internet radio, no YouTube and video, no surfing all you want. The last 10 days I can't even do much besides IM and e-mail since I'm always close to the traffic limit. Sure I could go over the limit and get a a much larger bill.
The largest flat rate package (again with the fair use policy) costs over 80 euro. Well, that's monopol.
And no, I don't starve. I have water (most of the time), even though we don't have water supply here (we use large reservoirs and collect rain water). But shit happens and sometimes we run out of water during summer, then we pay someone to get us a cistern of water. Apparently our local government are working on that (yay!). We have food and electricity (most of the time as the infrastructure is a disaster). We aren't dying of starvation like people in Ethiopia, but it is not easy compared to some people in the world who take food, water and electricity for granted.
Could I live without internet? Probably, but probably not as I'm a computer technologies student.
But hey, I want to surf the web, be able to update my OS and software, download Linux distributions and (free) games and play them, keep in touch with my relatives over Skype or other communication means (cause it's way cheaper than what the same company that gives us ADSL charges us for telephone), watch video and listen to internet radio, be part of the community, perform any tasks that for college requires internet, download drivers and other stuff, help my friends remotely over internet (e.g. Remote Desktop). I don't need to download gigabytes of music, videos and games, I just don't want to count every megabyte of traffic I spend in fear that I'll go over the limit and will have to pay more.
Soon Fedora 12 will be released and downloading the Fedora 12 DVD will be a pain, because I can kiss internet access goodbye for most of the month. Let's not mention downloading any extra packages I may need (there are always those) and updating Fedora and other packages over time.
Developing Nations Crippled By Broandband Costs. Well, duh! We're mostly crippled by those monopolistic opportunistic bastards in government and companies who don't give shit about people and progress as long as they have a comfortable life.
I've seen some here say that memory usage is not important unless you have a old computer. What if you run a lot of processes like I do. I have my IDE open, Firefox, Pidgin, Winamp or Rhytmbox, Several explorer or nautilus windows, subversion server, TortoiseSVN explorer extension(when on windows) etc. And I only have 512 MiB of memory. If I wanted to buy some more memory for my computer I'd probably have to decide between paying for memory(DDR400, which costs about twice as much as DDR2, even though it's older) or not paying for my internet connection(that would make the ISP very unhappy and me ending up on court getting sewed for not paying). I'm a student, don't have a job, and yeah, money is important, as well as memory is. Just because memory is 'cheap' these days is no excuse for writting a bloated memory hogging program. The browser is not the only thing that is running on peoples computers.
They may be coming in late on the parallel processing game, but they're ahead when it needs to patent it. They'd patent parallel parking if they could.
Walt Disney is screwed if the company that has him criogenically stored bankrupts. Though I am not sure if Walt Disney is actually frozen, it kinda shows that there are always perils when you entrust your private property(let's not mention your life) to other companies(or people). I always considered USA to be the role model for private property. The problem here is it seems that little in USA these days is private property.
I've used DOS, Windows 3.1, Windows XP and Vista(unfortunately). I've also used Linux(various Distros such as Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, and other) for the past three years(and will continue to use Linux). The conclusion I've came to is that I HATE them all. Each operating system has had at least two moments where I wanted to bang my head on the keyboard(but did not because I don't like physical violence over computer and components, though there was this 486 box). Perhaps, some time in the future I'll also use a Macintosh and hate it too.
If you can't make a game about one war, you should not make a game about any war. It's the same about jokes, if you can't tell the joke to the person it's about, you should not tell it to anyone. It's ok to make a WWII game because it was long ago, and there are no veterans, or a few of them complaining about it. If you made a game about WWII just after it was over(not that this is possible, just an example), you'd probably not be able to release it because a lot of feelings would get hurt. In my opinion it will never be ok to make a game about war until a good deal of time passes. Time heals all wounds.
Such a law should have been presented a long time ago. Though there are some illogical things like 10 or more hijackings, any should be considered a crime. People who experienced identity theft are mostly naive people, trusting other people too much. The number of 8.4 million is a very huge number, and a frightening one, because my country has two times less people at total. It would mean that if all people in my country had their identities stolen, it would be done twice, and probably everyone would end up as a beggar as there is nothing even similar to the proposed law in my country. If the USA intends to solve this problem, they should allow this bill as quickly as possible, and other countries should look-up at that example.
While you may be right about that, and mind that all these are relative opinions, I never said not to get updates at all, only disable them. In any case, why is it that everyone who uses Internet frequently has to have an anti-virus, ad malicious software protection tool and a firewall? Because, when it comes to certain things, all those updates are not gonna help you get even a half-decent protection against malicious software and hackers(or anyone with malicious intentions) on the internet. I used SP1 on my computer for 2 years, and I haven't had a single intrusion. I'd use SP2 but apparently there is a bug in it which Microsoft won't fix, ever, but all the unofficial(hacked) Windows version do not have, probably because they are missing some of those 'updates'. So there I am sitting with my Windows XP Professional SP2, which I paid 300$ for, got all the updates, and I still can't install bloody DAEMON-Tools. Does that sound right, and why does Microsoft not give me an update on that. Because "There are not any significant amount of users that need that significant bug fixed.", which is a more or less accurate quote from Microsoft.
It should be noted that with each new update you may also get a new bug or security vulnerability. Check out Vista, it should have been the most stable, bug-free and secure OS ever. That is what a Windows n00b would think. Just look at all the stories on slashdot about Vistas vulnerabilities or bugs, some of them are even funny.
I use both WinXP and Debian(Linux if you did not know), and I do multi-platform and multi-processor programming, I have been using Windows 3.11, ME and XP. And hell yeah, I know what I'm talking about.
And the next time I'm gonna turn the updates on, is when Bill gives me a blow-job.
Don't get offended, but anyone trusting Microsoft is the best next thing to a fool. It may only be my humble opinion, but it was drawn from experience of many people. Sometimes it's just best to put the damn update service to disabled.
Slashdot Mirror
If you compare Android with any other mobile OS you'll see that Android is open, or at least as open as it gets. Now, the definition of open is obscure, so we both can claim whatever we'd like (for one thing open never means free). Google has the right to call their OS whatever they'd like, just as Apple has the right to claim whatever BS they want too (e.g. the Mac vs PC ads). If you say Google is wrong to call Android open, then Apple is wrong to call a lot of BS about iPhone.
Yes, a different UI must really be hard. The only people I find that complain about this are the same ones who need to write down a step by step list of actions to perform a task (those would be people who do not like to think, even a bit). My god, whatever will clicking or touching an icon do, or scrolling the screen with my finger in the direction of the scroll bar? While there are differences between UIs, the common concepts behind them are all the same. But shit, it takes effort to learn new things. It's as hard as it is for a monkey to peal a banana. As far as the iPhone being the more innovative platform, I'd have to disagree. Because you see, you can't really be innovative with the iPhone. Remap the wrong keys and your app is history, regardless of how useful it might be. God forbid should we want to have something useful like a P2P app, or something that does not fit into Jobs moral guidelines. What is it that you can do with an iPhone or with iOS that you can't do with an Android, aside from being a douche. Google is right about calling iPhone closed. Because it IS CLOSED. Jobs would like to bend the truth here. Does Apple give me the iOS sources, unfettered transfer of files and apps, control over the device I bought, free use wherever and however I like? NO! Hence, it's closed. Case closed, my dear Watson.
I stopped reading at "ISPs lie", that's no news.
...with frickin' EMP attached to their heads!
The primary reason why I decided not to use DirectX is because there is no DirectX on Linux, Mac or anything else that does not come with a Microsoft branded logo. Advantages or not, DirectX is a proprietary API which cannot be used on non Microsoft platform, other than by means of reverse-engineering it (a la WINE).
Why do they call it piracy?
It's not like you had to board a ship, kill it's crew and rape the women, and then take the chest full of gold. Yeah, the author really had to walk the plank.
Here in Bosnia and Herzegovina you can get flat rate at our only ISP (HT Mostar) that provides ADSL (with fair use clause, which means it's not flat) internet access for over 40 euro with a 512/64 KBits/s connection (it's a mockery to call it broadband), with a 12 month contract minimum or you pay more. RIP-OFF.
Their advertisements and their behavior make me wanna puke.
I pay 20 for my 2048/256 KBit/s connection with 5 GiB monthly traffic. Seeing as there are 3 more people using the connection other than me, this is barely enough to have decent use of the internet. This means no internet radio, no YouTube and video, no surfing all you want. The last 10 days I can't even do much besides IM and e-mail since I'm always close to the traffic limit. Sure I could go over the limit and get a a much larger bill.
The largest flat rate package (again with the fair use policy) costs over 80 euro. Well, that's monopol.
And no, I don't starve. I have water (most of the time), even though we don't have water supply here (we use large reservoirs and collect rain water). But shit happens and sometimes we run out of water during summer, then we pay someone to get us a cistern of water. Apparently our local government are working on that (yay!). We have food and electricity (most of the time as the infrastructure is a disaster). We aren't dying of starvation like people in Ethiopia, but it is not easy compared to some people in the world who take food, water and electricity for granted.
Could I live without internet? Probably, but probably not as I'm a computer technologies student.
But hey, I want to surf the web, be able to update my OS and software, download Linux distributions and (free) games and play them, keep in touch with my relatives over Skype or other communication means (cause it's way cheaper than what the same company that gives us ADSL charges us for telephone), watch video and listen to internet radio, be part of the community, perform any tasks that for college requires internet, download drivers and other stuff, help my friends remotely over internet (e.g. Remote Desktop). I don't need to download gigabytes of music, videos and games, I just don't want to count every megabyte of traffic I spend in fear that I'll go over the limit and will have to pay more.
Soon Fedora 12 will be released and downloading the Fedora 12 DVD will be a pain, because I can kiss internet access goodbye for most of the month. Let's not mention downloading any extra packages I may need (there are always those) and updating Fedora and other packages over time.
Developing Nations Crippled By Broandband Costs. Well, duh! We're mostly crippled by those monopolistic opportunistic bastards in government and companies who don't give shit about people and progress as long as they have a comfortable life.
RIP OFF!
I've seen some here say that memory usage is not important unless you have a old computer. What if you run a lot of processes like I do. I have my IDE open, Firefox, Pidgin, Winamp or Rhytmbox, Several explorer or nautilus windows, subversion server, TortoiseSVN explorer extension(when on windows) etc. And I only have 512 MiB of memory. If I wanted to buy some more memory for my computer I'd probably have to decide between paying for memory(DDR400, which costs about twice as much as DDR2, even though it's older) or not paying for my internet connection(that would make the ISP very unhappy and me ending up on court getting sewed for not paying). I'm a student, don't have a job, and yeah, money is important, as well as memory is. Just because memory is 'cheap' these days is no excuse for writting a bloated memory hogging program. The browser is not the only thing that is running on peoples computers.
They may be coming in late on the parallel processing game, but they're ahead when it needs to patent it. They'd patent parallel parking if they could.
Walt Disney is screwed if the company that has him criogenically stored bankrupts. Though I am not sure if Walt Disney is actually frozen, it kinda shows that there are always perils when you entrust your private property(let's not mention your life) to other companies(or people). I always considered USA to be the role model for private property. The problem here is it seems that little in USA these days is private property.
I can hear the dogs outside...
It just goes to show that you're never safe from malware, at least not when using Windows.
I've used DOS, Windows 3.1, Windows XP and Vista(unfortunately). I've also used Linux(various Distros such as Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, and other) for the past three years(and will continue to use Linux). The conclusion I've came to is that I HATE them all. Each operating system has had at least two moments where I wanted to bang my head on the keyboard(but did not because I don't like physical violence over computer and components, though there was this 486 box). Perhaps, some time in the future I'll also use a Macintosh and hate it too.
If you can't make a game about one war, you should not make a game about any war. It's the same about jokes, if you can't tell the joke to the person it's about, you should not tell it to anyone. It's ok to make a WWII game because it was long ago, and there are no veterans, or a few of them complaining about it. If you made a game about WWII just after it was over(not that this is possible, just an example), you'd probably not be able to release it because a lot of feelings would get hurt. In my opinion it will never be ok to make a game about war until a good deal of time passes. Time heals all wounds.
Give up!
All I've got to say is that this dude is one heck of a sucker!
Such a law should have been presented a long time ago. Though there are some illogical things like 10 or more hijackings, any should be considered a crime. People who experienced identity theft are mostly naive people, trusting other people too much. The number of 8.4 million is a very huge number, and a frightening one, because my country has two times less people at total. It would mean that if all people in my country had their identities stolen, it would be done twice, and probably everyone would end up as a beggar as there is nothing even similar to the proposed law in my country. If the USA intends to solve this problem, they should allow this bill as quickly as possible, and other countries should look-up at that example.
While you may be right about that, and mind that all these are relative opinions, I never said not to get updates at all, only disable them. In any case, why is it that everyone who uses Internet frequently has to have an anti-virus, ad malicious software protection tool and a firewall? Because, when it comes to certain things, all those updates are not gonna help you get even a half-decent protection against malicious software and hackers(or anyone with malicious intentions) on the internet. I used SP1 on my computer for 2 years, and I haven't had a single intrusion. I'd use SP2 but apparently there is a bug in it which Microsoft won't fix, ever, but all the unofficial(hacked) Windows version do not have, probably because they are missing some of those 'updates'. So there I am sitting with my Windows XP Professional SP2, which I paid 300$ for, got all the updates, and I still can't install bloody DAEMON-Tools. Does that sound right, and why does Microsoft not give me an update on that. Because "There are not any significant amount of users that need that significant bug fixed.", which is a more or less accurate quote from Microsoft. It should be noted that with each new update you may also get a new bug or security vulnerability. Check out Vista, it should have been the most stable, bug-free and secure OS ever. That is what a Windows n00b would think. Just look at all the stories on slashdot about Vistas vulnerabilities or bugs, some of them are even funny. I use both WinXP and Debian(Linux if you did not know), and I do multi-platform and multi-processor programming, I have been using Windows 3.11, ME and XP. And hell yeah, I know what I'm talking about. And the next time I'm gonna turn the updates on, is when Bill gives me a blow-job.
Don't get offended, but anyone trusting Microsoft is the best next thing to a fool. It may only be my humble opinion, but it was drawn from experience of many people. Sometimes it's just best to put the damn update service to disabled.