Nothing Google has done has been surprising to date. They try not to be evil, but making money will always be the trump card. There "Don't be evil" motto has never been a higher priority than "Making money," which I am sure the stockholders are very appreciative of.
"An unbiased observer might wonder about an agenda of slowing the OLPC project and the spread of open source in general."
Give me a break! Another completely irresponsible statement make it into TFA's description here on slashdot.
I can see it now, Microsoft called a meeting to talk about the threat of OLPC, right after they started working more with open source (Novell). Of course the cynics will say that it was just a "keep your enemies closer" move.
If anything, an unbiased observer would see this as a good thing, maybe the best thing possible, if you are the people this and OLPC will benefit. Competition will only help to get the OLPC under $100 someday, not hurt.
So what, Microsoft thought a different way to help those in need, and itself, in the long run. Tell me what is wrong with that?
All of this is of course based on the scope of the project, but if you are serving up information to a browser, there is certainly a number of queries that will show MySQL's shortcomings. We can argue for ages about what can and cant work for this or that project, but all I was trying to convey was that for any project of significant size or importance, MySQL is not the best answer. It may be an answer, just not the best.
Yes it is. Compliance matters, but it is a moot issue now. As long as they continue to work towards compliance among all browsers and the discussion remains open, that is all we can ask for. Compliance sounds easy, but first they need to all agree on what exactly is the defined standard and how to adopt and apply new standards. If we were all compliant today and they decided to add CSS3 support, maybe only 2 browsers adopt that ASAP, while Firefox takes a month to get around to it. The problems like that will be around for a while, so we are stuck with how things are for a while. Not to mention, even if they all worked together for compliance tomorrow, we are still developing for IE6 for at least 2 more years.
Flash can be great, Flash can be horrible, it depends on what and how something is delivered. Flash has always left a bad taste for web developers and many end users, but nothing to threaten the format, till now?
The only way Flash will go away is by people not watching whatever is delivered through that medium. Be it through blocking the technology or using another, voting with your dollar is what decides how these formats will survive. When I read this, I tend to think that this will only serve to bother people; bother people like pop-ups did/do; bother them enough to block the ads. We all know the results of pop-up blockers, it is way less pop-ups to block. If that happens to Flash, it will likely be an reversible trend. Think about it, once you start blocking something, even partially, what are the chances you ever lift that block? Any damage Adobe causes with this, might be reversible.
We are all going to be making a majority of our sites to work in IE6 for many years to come. The release of IE7 did hardly anything to change how I design my pages. All it did was add another browser to test in really. IE6 will remain on old Windows OS's (2000 cant run IE7) and non-upgraded machines; therefore, we will all develop for them as we have for some time now.
All this means to me as a developer is that I have another thing to keep track of in regards to my industry. Add it to the list which includes: Seeing if AJAX, RoR, and other Web 2.0 fads survive the next year; if PHP has even a glimmer of hope; PNG issues; content delivery to mobile devices; and of course assorted security issues.
We always have something new coming down the pipe, but that does not mean it is the next new thing. Many sing the praises of AJAX, but really it is far from perfect and likely to be replaced by something much better very soon. Nature of the biz I suppose, but I would not have it any other way !
Well it looks like there might be a chance that our PC's and consoles will have interchangeable controllers! How nice would it be to not have that extra $200 investment in controllers and such! Surely the next generation of consoles will all but abandoned the d-pad controller types for the far superior keyboard/mouse type set-ups.
Then again, it is still only hope... they will find another way to make that money.
I just have everything I like fed to my Google homepage. I can even read the whole article without having to actually going to the website the feed came from with some feeds. I do not have a rotation of sites either, I only read something if the title/desc sounds like something I might want to read.
I have 5 boxes I use everyday. Whenever I have a fresh, clean install of anything, I will just compare the new box with an existing box to make sure I have all the essentials and that everything is working good. Then I have a master directory I keep of installers and different archives so I know where and what I have installed. I reference that folder whenever I set up a new box and it goes really quick. After that only have a few windows settings to adjust and I am good to go.
Once signed up, you can challenge me if you wish, I am not that great at all. My name on there is the part of my username here on/. after the (.) with 9797 to the end. So it is in the format myname9797
Everything does take to long to finish in one sitting usually.
That is why I play chess with friends via correspondence.
I can use a program/site or just use IM/Email using chess notation. The site offers a ton of features, but after a while you should be able to play chess games without ever having to see the board physically. Instead you just read it with notation.
Of course, most games cannot be played via notation, but via correspondence, it is surely an option.
Edit: Average game of ~30 moves takes about anywhere from 3 to 30 days for me. Most finish within 3-5 days.
While it made the game, more or less, a one race game, it added a huge element to the end game, which is where War2 multiplayer shined for some time. It brought the need to micromanage to the board, which, while always a factor, was not essential to victory.
So in essence, it brought heavy macromanagement and micromanagement together.
Marketing, not sales. People looking to invest $600 in something to make them more productive are going to care much more about what the phone can or cant do. The iPod does not market its capabilities at all. You only see a few general specs (Xgigs, plays video, is small) and the rest is all about, "Look at me, I am cool!" The iPhone is not going to win nearly as many people with its cool factor when the competition is wooing them with capabilities and functionality.
Apples has a much better marketing department and Microsoft has a much better business model for its shareholders. Both make the companies money in different ways and both companies are different in how they approach making money, but Microsoft's model has been proved to work. Apples great image is dependent how the mass market views its marketing campaign. Marketing can get you into the industry as a competitor, but it can only do so much for so long.
This is not to say that Apple does not make quality products though, both companies do. I just feel that Microsoft has something that will outlast the fad Apples marketing department has created. As Apple branches off into new markets where specs are more important, we may see a new take on Apple advertising. If not, then we will see iPod type ads for the iPhone, which will not resonate well at all to people looking for smart phones where, of course, specs are the name of the game.
Apple's grip on the market, from its marketing/fad trend, is waning in my eyes. It certainly does not carry the same cool factor anymore, actually, if anything it will begin to work against them. The same people that adopted the iPod early (non-conformists, trend setters) are looking to new and better things now. Where before the iPod did not have to compete much outside of cheer marketing, they are going to face a never ending supply of well backed competition.
Apple's marketing is the reason we care about Apple products. They have among the best marketing schemes in the USA and they have rode it to great success. The iPod was never sold on their specs or capabilities, ever. I have never seen an iPod add that mentioned anything other than the size of the iPod (space and actual size) and that it played video. That goes to show that people bought the marketing, not the capabilities. Now that people are less receptive to their campaign and others are competing directly, the iPod is in for a war that will be fought in the public. Time will tell though, I feel their campaigns are still very strong.
The Zune and Microsoft will have to grow over time and over versions to be a powerhouse in the market. They have a solid campaign, but they entered the market when it was being well-saturated, so they missed the bus of course. Now new mp3 player sales are going to have a much higher percentage of people who are replacing a current player. That is where the Zune will have to make an impact in order to even the playing field.
Wrong. Their high end employees were replaced. The jobs we do not want to do(they are below us) in our industry got outsourced. Unless you were doing tech support, your probably are not hugely effected by outsourcing. Exceptions, of course, exist.
If it did in fact sell more, how can the claim "Vista has sold more copies than XP did in the same time period" be "bunk" exactly?
The same way that if said you made $1,000,001 today, and I said I made $1,000,000 thirty years ago, I would have made more money. See that extra factor "inflation" plays in. While before we run the figures through adjustForInflation(float) your figure is bigger, the same is not true afterwards.
Now to apply the above example to our problem. Simply replace adjustForInflation() with adjustForMarketsize(). You will find that after adjust for the factor, the results change.
Technology adoption has grown dramatically since that time. This is similar to the Vista outselling XP story. The truth is, since XP came out the PC market grew by a huge percentage, thus making the Vista sales claim bunk.
Not everyone is committed to open source. The MAC fanboys do not care one bit about Open Source, that is our job as nerds and geeks. That being said, these people want MAC's to have software they call their own so they not look so far inferior to Microsoft, when comparing the issue. I would argue that Apple cares less about Open Source than Microsoft.
You are certainly right. I am just thinking that, if they wanted to obtain a better definition or understanding of the story, looking up pretexting would yield much more valuable and related information than just looking up fraud. That make sense? I agree with you really, just playing the devil's advocate if you will.
Slashdot Mirror
Nothing Google has done has been surprising to date. They try not to be evil, but making money will always be the trump card. There "Don't be evil" motto has never been a higher priority than "Making money," which I am sure the stockholders are very appreciative of.
We (USA) hosted it in 1996... any predictions for the next 18 months?
"An unbiased observer might wonder about an agenda of slowing the OLPC project and the spread of open source in general."
Give me a break! Another completely irresponsible statement make it into TFA's description here on slashdot. I can see it now, Microsoft called a meeting to talk about the threat of OLPC, right after they started working more with open source (Novell). Of course the cynics will say that it was just a "keep your enemies closer" move.
If anything, an unbiased observer would see this as a good thing, maybe the best thing possible, if you are the people this and OLPC will benefit. Competition will only help to get the OLPC under $100 someday, not hurt.
So what, Microsoft thought a different way to help those in need, and itself, in the long run. Tell me what is wrong with that?
All of this is of course based on the scope of the project, but if you are serving up information to a browser, there is certainly a number of queries that will show MySQL's shortcomings. We can argue for ages about what can and cant work for this or that project, but all I was trying to convey was that for any project of significant size or importance, MySQL is not the best answer. It may be an answer, just not the best.
Yes it is. Compliance matters, but it is a moot issue now. As long as they continue to work towards compliance among all browsers and the discussion remains open, that is all we can ask for. Compliance sounds easy, but first they need to all agree on what exactly is the defined standard and how to adopt and apply new standards. If we were all compliant today and they decided to add CSS3 support, maybe only 2 browsers adopt that ASAP, while Firefox takes a month to get around to it. The problems like that will be around for a while, so we are stuck with how things are for a while. Not to mention, even if they all worked together for compliance tomorrow, we are still developing for IE6 for at least 2 more years.
Flash can be great, Flash can be horrible, it depends on what and how something is delivered. Flash has always left a bad taste for web developers and many end users, but nothing to threaten the format, till now?
The only way Flash will go away is by people not watching whatever is delivered through that medium. Be it through blocking the technology or using another, voting with your dollar is what decides how these formats will survive. When I read this, I tend to think that this will only serve to bother people; bother people like pop-ups did/do; bother them enough to block the ads. We all know the results of pop-up blockers, it is way less pop-ups to block. If that happens to Flash, it will likely be an reversible trend. Think about it, once you start blocking something, even partially, what are the chances you ever lift that block? Any damage Adobe causes with this, might be reversible.
Thoughts?
We are all going to be making a majority of our sites to work in IE6 for many years to come. The release of IE7 did hardly anything to change how I design my pages. All it did was add another browser to test in really. IE6 will remain on old Windows OS's (2000 cant run IE7) and non-upgraded machines; therefore, we will all develop for them as we have for some time now.
All this means to me as a developer is that I have another thing to keep track of in regards to my industry. Add it to the list which includes: Seeing if AJAX, RoR, and other Web 2.0 fads survive the next year; if PHP has even a glimmer of hope; PNG issues; content delivery to mobile devices; and of course assorted security issues.
We always have something new coming down the pipe, but that does not mean it is the next new thing. Many sing the praises of AJAX, but really it is far from perfect and likely to be replaced by something much better very soon. Nature of the biz I suppose, but I would not have it any other way !
Well it looks like there might be a chance that our PC's and consoles will have interchangeable controllers! How nice would it be to not have that extra $200 investment in controllers and such! Surely the next generation of consoles will all but abandoned the d-pad controller types for the far superior keyboard/mouse type set-ups.
Then again, it is still only hope... they will find another way to make that money.
I just have everything I like fed to my Google homepage. I can even read the whole article without having to actually going to the website the feed came from with some feeds. I do not have a rotation of sites either, I only read something if the title/desc sounds like something I might want to read.
I have 5 boxes I use everyday. Whenever I have a fresh, clean install of anything, I will just compare the new box with an existing box to make sure I have all the essentials and that everything is working good. Then I have a master directory I keep of installers and different archives so I know where and what I have installed. I reference that folder whenever I set up a new box and it goes really quick. After that only have a few windows settings to adjust and I am good to go.
Sure! RedHotPawn.com
/. after the (.) with 9797 to the end. So it is in the format myname9797
Once signed up, you can challenge me if you wish, I am not that great at all. My name on there is the part of my username here on
Everything does take to long to finish in one sitting usually.
That is why I play chess with friends via correspondence.
I can use a program/site or just use IM/Email using chess notation. The site offers a ton of features, but after a while you should be able to play chess games without ever having to see the board physically. Instead you just read it with notation.
Of course, most games cannot be played via notation, but via correspondence, it is surely an option.
Edit: Average game of ~30 moves takes about anywhere from 3 to 30 days for me. Most finish within 3-5 days.
While it made the game, more or less, a one race game, it added a huge element to the end game, which is where War2 multiplayer shined for some time. It brought the need to micromanage to the board, which, while always a factor, was not essential to victory.
So in essence, it brought heavy macromanagement and micromanagement together.
Marketing, not sales. People looking to invest $600 in something to make them more productive are going to care much more about what the phone can or cant do. The iPod does not market its capabilities at all. You only see a few general specs (Xgigs, plays video, is small) and the rest is all about, "Look at me, I am cool!" The iPhone is not going to win nearly as many people with its cool factor when the competition is wooing them with capabilities and functionality.
Apples has a much better marketing department and Microsoft has a much better business model for its shareholders. Both make the companies money in different ways and both companies are different in how they approach making money, but Microsoft's model has been proved to work. Apples great image is dependent how the mass market views its marketing campaign. Marketing can get you into the industry as a competitor, but it can only do so much for so long.
This is not to say that Apple does not make quality products though, both companies do. I just feel that Microsoft has something that will outlast the fad Apples marketing department has created. As Apple branches off into new markets where specs are more important, we may see a new take on Apple advertising. If not, then we will see iPod type ads for the iPhone, which will not resonate well at all to people looking for smart phones where, of course, specs are the name of the game.
Apple's grip on the market, from its marketing/fad trend, is waning in my eyes. It certainly does not carry the same cool factor anymore, actually, if anything it will begin to work against them. The same people that adopted the iPod early (non-conformists, trend setters) are looking to new and better things now. Where before the iPod did not have to compete much outside of cheer marketing, they are going to face a never ending supply of well backed competition.
Apple's marketing is the reason we care about Apple products. They have among the best marketing schemes in the USA and they have rode it to great success. The iPod was never sold on their specs or capabilities, ever. I have never seen an iPod add that mentioned anything other than the size of the iPod (space and actual size) and that it played video. That goes to show that people bought the marketing, not the capabilities. Now that people are less receptive to their campaign and others are competing directly, the iPod is in for a war that will be fought in the public. Time will tell though, I feel their campaigns are still very strong.
The Zune and Microsoft will have to grow over time and over versions to be a powerhouse in the market. They have a solid campaign, but they entered the market when it was being well-saturated, so they missed the bus of course. Now new mp3 player sales are going to have a much higher percentage of people who are replacing a current player. That is where the Zune will have to make an impact in order to even the playing field.
Wrong. Their high end employees were replaced. The jobs we do not want to do(they are below us) in our industry got outsourced. Unless you were doing tech support, your probably are not hugely effected by outsourcing. Exceptions, of course, exist.
The same way that if said you made $1,000,001 today, and I said I made $1,000,000 thirty years ago, I would have made more money. See that extra factor "inflation" plays in. While before we run the figures through adjustForInflation(float) your figure is bigger, the same is not true afterwards.
Now to apply the above example to our problem. Simply replace adjustForInflation() with adjustForMarketsize(). You will find that after adjust for the factor, the results change.
Technology adoption has grown dramatically since that time. This is similar to the Vista outselling XP story. The truth is, since XP came out the PC market grew by a huge percentage, thus making the Vista sales claim bunk.
Yes, I know, it is a bad habit as the AC pointed out.
Not everyone is committed to open source. The MAC fanboys do not care one bit about Open Source, that is our job as nerds and geeks. That being said, these people want MAC's to have software they call their own so they not look so far inferior to Microsoft, when comparing the issue. I would argue that Apple cares less about Open Source than Microsoft.
So in other words, the fastest depreciating piece of hardware ever has been produced and is now available for you to waste money on.
OS X is Unix based...
You are certainly right. I am just thinking that, if they wanted to obtain a better definition or understanding of the story, looking up pretexting would yield much more valuable and related information than just looking up fraud. That make sense? I agree with you really, just playing the devil's advocate if you will.