Here's a surprise for anyone who's gotten used to my usual Google-praising: IMO, Blogger could stand to be in beta for a while longer--the new Blogger template tags still fail to produce W3C compliant links etc. If Google developers aren't going to follow the rules, why do they leave the strict DOCTYPE in their templates?
As far as "bridging the divide between open-source and proprietary-source software" is concerned, Ballmer doesn't seem to grasp that the basic concept of open vs. closed. His so-called "divide" isn't something that can just be patched up like so many Microsoft products. The only way to "bridge" the difference between open and closed is with a hinge.
So which way does Ballmer expect to bridge this door?
I agree with your first couple of statements. I love working with JavaScript (yes, even with prototypal inheritance). I tend to get around the specific problem you describe (which has a name: Internet Explorer) by encapsulating commonly problematic functions (such as addEventListener). In doing so, I can write modern standards compliant JavaScript (which doesn't make it ECMAScript, that would be a bloody stupid name) without sacrificing cross-browser compatibility.
However, there's another issue in the client: speed. I am extremely dissatisfied with the speed at which JavaScript is interpreted. It's a real bottleneck. Because I like working with JavaScript so much, I've started designing a JavaScript-only widget library which uses modern W3C & ECMA compliant DOM methods to create widgets. The purpose was twofold: cut out the middleman (HTML) in developing web "2.0" apps, and introduce a method of developing web apps that allows us to completely separate our server-side code from our client (as opposed to the coupling that exists w/current toolkits). It's an interesting study, but has some obvious drawbacks: it's not downgradable, not accessible for screenreaders, and draws widgets ridiculously slowly compared to a page with the equivalent HTML elements. The last of these three drawbacks is out of my control: the only workaround I have found is to forgo compliance in favor of using innerHTML. No thanks.
I've been looking forward to Wii's release for some time, especially Virtual Console. Flicking through the linked manual, I have a couple of concerns. Check this out:
Content downloaded from the Wii Shop Channel is saved within your Wii console memory... If the content you want to download requires more memory blocks than you have available, you will need to manage your content... You can either move memory blocks to an SD card, or you can delete channels or games you no longer need ready access to. If you decide to delete a game or channel, you can always return to the Wii Shop Channel and re-download it at no additional cost.
Content downloaded through the Wii Shop Channel cannot be downloaded directly to an SD card.
Typically, Nintendo has been pretty good about continuing support for legacy equipment, but can they really depended on to support and serve the Wii Shop Channel indefinitely? If I have to depend on them for archives of my games, I need a solid answer to this question: 10 years from now, when Wii is just a distant memory, will I still be able to re-download the copy of Goldeneye 007 I had to delete to make space for Star Fox?
Interesting suggestion, but this isn't what the company is being taken to court for. This case concerns movies being ripped from DVD to an iPod-video compatible format; a list which does not include CSS-protected 720x480 MPEG2. I doubt Apple could get the licensing to develop such a concept, and even if they could I'm not certain there wouldn't be further legal or technical issues. As for anyone else accomplishing this: I'm not aware of any custom application development for iPod's default OS.
IANAL, but I'm fairly certain that any method of turning a CSS-protected DVD into an iPod Video compatible movie file could be labeled "circumventing CSS", even if it does so indirectly by capturing a video stream.
One word of caution re switching: the above may be true of Windows Server 2003 switching to a GUIless Linux distro, but I was recently shocked to notice just how much more juice I was sucking up after switching from Windows XP Pro (default settings) to Kubuntu (default settings). Probably, here's why: I was using a laptop. (I really honestly sincerely doubt that using KDE made all that difference!)
Linux is great for desktop use, but power consumption is just one of the many problems I've run into as a laptop Linux user. Once again, Linux is hampered by the "Windows-only" approach manufacturers are only starting to drop.
If you're going to have given people grammar advice, at least have done it correctly: you're using the the present ultraconditional subinverted sem-active past subjunctive deponent aorist, so that should have been "scrodding".
Reporter: "There's a lot of excitement about the iPhone..."
Jobs: "Wait. The what phone?"
Reporter: "Er... the iPhone; the brand new device that's meant to do to the cellphone what iPod did to the walkman. Flash based MP3 player, revolutionary new interface... I thought you may have heard of it?"
Jobs: "Hmm, sounds good. Put be down for 12 million of those babies."
I don't want to make too big a deal out of this, but: your interpretation is in your hands. If you choose to temper judgment with common sense (such as the context of current discussion: SUSE and other desktop-centric Linux distributions), life will be easier for all involved. If you decide to style every conversation as a courtroom battle, you're a bigoted pedant: you may find yourself struggling to maintain what friendship you have.
What we say can be accurately misinterpreted even when we are careful to be precise. Consider: "Garnish that dish, or I shall garnish your salary!" By your rule, this could be interpreted as: "Seize that dish (to make up for some loss), or I shall make your salary more attractive by the addition of decorative details!" Of course, such an interpretation would be completely devoid of that human quality, "Common Sense"; exactly like computers.
It isn't what he said, but by "people" I assume he means "every-day computer users". I don't know of any every-day computer users who use Apache, know what it is, or care. This is the biggest problem with Linux adoption; Kubuntu isn't significantly less friendly than Windows, but few every-day users know about it or care. It's an answer to a question they aren't asking. Unfortunately, that probably won't change, and there's little Linux developers can do to change it.
I am also a privacy activist. While it is true that you seem to take more care than others in preserving your privacy, your methods are inadequate for protect yourself against the British government.
You must remember that any information that uniquely identifies you can and will be used against you. You must never drop your guard. For example, since the government started putting RFID tags inside banknotes, I pay for items using only £1 and £2 coins. I keep them sealed in a lead container for obvious reasons. Also, I do not use a bank. Instead, I keep my savings in my basement in gold bullion. This also means my savings can still be accessed after bank closing hours.
Our address is registered as abandoned and several hundred meters below sea level. Our mailing address is actually a post office box several towns away maintained under a fake identity.
Our employers hold no correct information about us and pay us only in precious metals and stones.
Paying for items with cash (coins only) only is a wise step toward protecting yourself, but I also remove all book covers and replace them with blank cardboard sheets so that no one can see what I'm reading (and to shed any tracking/monitoring equipment embedded in the cover).
I do not own a telephone (land line or cellular) and use only public (street) telephones to call others. We keep a list of public telephone boxes in our area and cycle through them randomly for each phone call we need to make. When speaking on the phone, we use special callsigns to identify one another and only speak in pig latin.
When leaving the house, my wife always wears a burka and we both wear flat soled shoes (with no grips or other markings) at least 3 sizes to large, but stuffed with filling to make up the difference. To remain inconspicuous and unidentifiable, I wear a suit, bowler hat, and face-sized Granny Smith apple mask at all times. Behind the eye sockets, I wear heavily tinted sunglasses and colored contact lenses.
We both shave all hair from our bodies, wear tissues over our fingertips, and ensure none of our skin is exposed. In case we cut ourselves and accidentally leave a bloodstain, we carry a bag containing blood from several other people, which we then use to cover the stain.
Absolutely. I'm fed up with seeing/hearing "just burn and rip" and other quality-dashing advice thoughtlessly thrown around online and in news forums, often without the warning that quality loss would be experienced. One forum user even argued that there would be no quality loss "because they're both digital formats".
On the other hand, it is understandable to some degree: would audiophiles really download a 128 kbps AAC file? According to Dolby Labs, the average listener couldn't tell the difference between 128 kbps AAC and an audio CD--I doubt this is the case for audiophiles.
According to the T&C for most of Google's services, all hate speech (including racism) is banned. So the answers to your question, according to Google, is that racist speech is more evil than censorship.
Speaking of props, what would all the media companies do without Apple hardware? I'm seeing more and more commercials that use Apple laptops as props (with logos removed and Windows XP screens overlaid onto them).
Slashdot Mirror
Here's a surprise for anyone who's gotten used to my usual Google-praising: IMO, Blogger could stand to be in beta for a while longer--the new Blogger template tags still fail to produce W3C compliant links etc. If Google developers aren't going to follow the rules, why do they leave the strict DOCTYPE in their templates?
As far as "bridging the divide between open-source and proprietary-source software" is concerned, Ballmer doesn't seem to grasp that the basic concept of open vs. closed. His so-called "divide" isn't something that can just be patched up like so many Microsoft products. The only way to "bridge" the difference between open and closed is with a hinge.
So which way does Ballmer expect to bridge this door?
I agree with your first couple of statements. I love working with JavaScript (yes, even with prototypal inheritance). I tend to get around the specific problem you describe (which has a name: Internet Explorer) by encapsulating commonly problematic functions (such as addEventListener). In doing so, I can write modern standards compliant JavaScript (which doesn't make it ECMAScript, that would be a bloody stupid name) without sacrificing cross-browser compatibility.
However, there's another issue in the client: speed. I am extremely dissatisfied with the speed at which JavaScript is interpreted. It's a real bottleneck. Because I like working with JavaScript so much, I've started designing a JavaScript-only widget library which uses modern W3C & ECMA compliant DOM methods to create widgets. The purpose was twofold: cut out the middleman (HTML) in developing web "2.0" apps, and introduce a method of developing web apps that allows us to completely separate our server-side code from our client (as opposed to the coupling that exists w/current toolkits). It's an interesting study, but has some obvious drawbacks: it's not downgradable, not accessible for screenreaders, and draws widgets ridiculously slowly compared to a page with the equivalent HTML elements. The last of these three drawbacks is out of my control: the only workaround I have found is to forgo compliance in favor of using innerHTML. No thanks.
Among those dancing in California's streets are radio DJs, the jerky boys, and Bart Simpson.
Let's all prank call MPAA, just to thank them for protecting our right to do so.
Ever tried making omelet with no eggs?
The manual explicitly states that "Content downloaded through the Wii Shop Channel cannot be downloaded directly to an SD card."
Though it mentions transferring blocks to the SD card, it appears to be referring to game saves--not to the games themselves.
Please let me know if my interpretation is incorrect, though!
I've been looking forward to Wii's release for some time, especially Virtual Console. Flicking through the linked manual, I have a couple of concerns. Check this out:
Typically, Nintendo has been pretty good about continuing support for legacy equipment, but can they really depended on to support and serve the Wii Shop Channel indefinitely? If I have to depend on them for archives of my games, I need a solid answer to this question: 10 years from now, when Wii is just a distant memory, will I still be able to re-download the copy of Goldeneye 007 I had to delete to make space for Star Fox?
True, but due to technical issues they did not add higher-resolution video support to the older 320x240 capable 5th gen iPod Video.
Apple hasn't released or even hinted at an iPod Video custom development SDK. I hope they do, but doubt they will.
In the meantime, you're welcome to try developing such a system for iPod Linux. I doubt you'll get very far.
Interesting suggestion, but this isn't what the company is being taken to court for. This case concerns movies being ripped from DVD to an iPod-video compatible format; a list which does not include CSS-protected 720x480 MPEG2. I doubt Apple could get the licensing to develop such a concept, and even if they could I'm not certain there wouldn't be further legal or technical issues. As for anyone else accomplishing this: I'm not aware of any custom application development for iPod's default OS.
(BTW, GP: please don't bring up the "cache is a copy" argument. No matter how many times it's suggested, it doesn't sound any less ridiculous.)
That's for playback, not for storage. Again, IANAL but I'm pretty sure copyright law only really kicks in when copies are made.
Is anyone certain on the proper definition of "circumvention" as it relates to CSS-protected DVDs?
IANAL, but I'm fairly certain that any method of turning a CSS-protected DVD into an iPod Video compatible movie file could be labeled "circumventing CSS", even if it does so indirectly by capturing a video stream.
Microsoft has taken your request into consideration and shall endeavor to complete the following platform improvements by 14:00 UTC:
1 x 16'x64' to 32'x256' platform UPGRADE. Price: $200.00
1 x 32'x256' platform service pack 1 (145lbs). Price: free service
1 x 32'x256' platform reinforcement for service pack support. Price: free service
1 x 32'x256' platform area professional cleaning. Price: $100.00
1 x 32'x256' platform overcoat. Matte. Green. Price: $300.00
1 x 94" Ritchey-Chretien reflector (46' collecting, 189ft focal) to improve platform focus. Price: $10,000,000.00
1 x Fairly Green Advantage barricades to help Microsoft fight color theft. Price: free service
Total cost of improvements to platform: $10,000,600.00
One word of caution re switching: the above may be true of Windows Server 2003 switching to a GUIless Linux distro, but I was recently shocked to notice just how much more juice I was sucking up after switching from Windows XP Pro (default settings) to Kubuntu (default settings). Probably, here's why: I was using a laptop. (I really honestly sincerely doubt that using KDE made all that difference!)
Linux is great for desktop use, but power consumption is just one of the many problems I've run into as a laptop Linux user. Once again, Linux is hampered by the "Windows-only" approach manufacturers are only starting to drop.
Can you change the screensaver to "blank" at least?
Microsoft is just one line away from becoming the greenest company on earth:
RGB(0,256,0)
It's like green, but it's "one more" than green. It's the greenest.
I haven't seen an app this green since I switched from AS/400.
If you're going to have given people grammar advice, at least have done it correctly: you're using the the present ultraconditional subinverted sem-active past subjunctive deponent aorist, so that should have been "scrodding".
Reporter: "There's a lot of excitement about the iPhone..."
Jobs: "Wait. The what phone?"
Reporter: "Er... the iPhone; the brand new device that's meant to do to the cellphone what iPod did to the walkman. Flash based MP3 player, revolutionary new interface... I thought you may have heard of it?"
Jobs: "Hmm, sounds good. Put be down for 12 million of those babies."
Reporter: "Er, I don't work for you, Mr. Jobs."
Jobs: "You're fired."
That wasn't Jabber, you insensitive clod. It was AppleTalk.
I don't want to make too big a deal out of this, but: your interpretation is in your hands. If you choose to temper judgment with common sense (such as the context of current discussion: SUSE and other desktop-centric Linux distributions), life will be easier for all involved. If you decide to style every conversation as a courtroom battle, you're a bigoted pedant: you may find yourself struggling to maintain what friendship you have.
What we say can be accurately misinterpreted even when we are careful to be precise. Consider: "Garnish that dish, or I shall garnish your salary!" By your rule, this could be interpreted as: "Seize that dish (to make up for some loss), or I shall make your salary more attractive by the addition of decorative details!" Of course, such an interpretation would be completely devoid of that human quality, "Common Sense"; exactly like computers.
It isn't what he said, but by "people" I assume he means "every-day computer users". I don't know of any every-day computer users who use Apache, know what it is, or care. This is the biggest problem with Linux adoption; Kubuntu isn't significantly less friendly than Windows, but few every-day users know about it or care. It's an answer to a question they aren't asking. Unfortunately, that probably won't change, and there's little Linux developers can do to change it.
I am also a privacy activist. While it is true that you seem to take more care than others in preserving your privacy, your methods are inadequate for protect yourself against the British government.
You must remember that any information that uniquely identifies you can and will be used against you. You must never drop your guard. For example, since the government started putting RFID tags inside banknotes, I pay for items using only £1 and £2 coins. I keep them sealed in a lead container for obvious reasons. Also, I do not use a bank. Instead, I keep my savings in my basement in gold bullion. This also means my savings can still be accessed after bank closing hours.
Our address is registered as abandoned and several hundred meters below sea level. Our mailing address is actually a post office box several towns away maintained under a fake identity.
Our employers hold no correct information about us and pay us only in precious metals and stones.
Paying for items with cash (coins only) only is a wise step toward protecting yourself, but I also remove all book covers and replace them with blank cardboard sheets so that no one can see what I'm reading (and to shed any tracking/monitoring equipment embedded in the cover).
I do not own a telephone (land line or cellular) and use only public (street) telephones to call others. We keep a list of public telephone boxes in our area and cycle through them randomly for each phone call we need to make. When speaking on the phone, we use special callsigns to identify one another and only speak in pig latin.
When leaving the house, my wife always wears a burka and we both wear flat soled shoes (with no grips or other markings) at least 3 sizes to large, but stuffed with filling to make up the difference. To remain inconspicuous and unidentifiable, I wear a suit, bowler hat, and face-sized Granny Smith apple mask at all times. Behind the eye sockets, I wear heavily tinted sunglasses and colored contact lenses.
We both shave all hair from our bodies, wear tissues over our fingertips, and ensure none of our skin is exposed. In case we cut ourselves and accidentally leave a bloodstain, we carry a bag containing blood from several other people, which we then use to cover the stain.
Lastly, we never use computers or the internet.
Oh, crap.
Absolutely. I'm fed up with seeing/hearing "just burn and rip" and other quality-dashing advice thoughtlessly thrown around online and in news forums, often without the warning that quality loss would be experienced. One forum user even argued that there would be no quality loss "because they're both digital formats".
On the other hand, it is understandable to some degree: would audiophiles really download a 128 kbps AAC file? According to Dolby Labs, the average listener couldn't tell the difference between 128 kbps AAC and an audio CD--I doubt this is the case for audiophiles.
According to the T&C for most of Google's services, all hate speech (including racism) is banned. So the answers to your question, according to Google, is that racist speech is more evil than censorship.
Speaking of props, what would all the media companies do without Apple hardware? I'm seeing more and more commercials that use Apple laptops as props (with logos removed and Windows XP screens overlaid onto them).