Yep, you're right. I've just had my fill of combative statements. "Im going to assume you're a clueless moron, make a statement built on that premise, and even if you prove yourself I'll stick with it until the end."
I hear you, but i guess what it comes down to mainly is that fact that you shouldnt choose a editor today because of predictions set for 30 years from now. Sure, chose a format that balances future accessibility with immediate usability, but dont overestimate how easy format conversions are, both now and in the future.
Do you mean for individuals like me or you (or small businesses, etc...), or are we talking in the context of things like medical records where people live for 70+ years? The latter is where I'm coming from, if that helps explain my view. I wouldn't apply that philosophy for my own immediate needs.
Erm yeah, I was unclear. I haven't tried RIM's service. I'm a Rhapsody subscriber, their service is unlimited. Napster is like that, too. I can't imagine preferring the 50 song approach.
So . ..uh. . . why wouldn't you bet on it? A precedent has been set, but you choose to think that the open alternative will support more backward compatibility. . . why?
Well, for one thing, I'm not just talking about backwards compatibility, I'm talking about being able to open old files in the app they were originally written in. Now, I will concede right now that the latter isn't all that necessary if backwards compatibility is properly maintained and 100%. The only problem I have with 'bettin on it' is that I would genuinely be surprised if by 2030 the equivalent of LibreOffice will be able to properly open a doc I've written in the current version of Word today. I mean, if you follow all the b.s. surrounding reverse-engineerring of the.doc format, and trying to get OSS alternatives to open it, and Microsoft intentionally being a moving target, well personally that gives me pause for thought.
Hmm I'm not sure I'm clearly explaining myself here so I'll try another approach. Here's a few questions I have about the year 2030 and docs I've written today:
- Will Microsoft still be developing Office software in a form that we would find familiar today? (as opposed to going in a wild direction or dropping it altogether because competition has wiped them out?
- If Office 2030 is around, would a document open and look 100% correct? Will all its macros etc still run? (I mainly ask this because it sounds like MS would prefer to use JavaScript now, possibly so docs will work within a browser, too...)
- If Office 2030 isn't around, or if it doesn't properly open the files, will today's versions of Office be around? Will I be able to start them and open the doc through there?
- If Microsoft stopped developing Office, would they release the complete specification of the format?
- Would an alternative app be able to fire up this 20 year old doc and have it come up 100% correct?
In 20 years youll end up with a bunch of documents in an obsolete format. Congratulations, you have the source code that wrote them. Now all you will have to do is write you own converter.
Here's my thinking: Theoretically speaking, LibreOffice and its source code will be around in 2030. Even today's version of it. (Is this a reasonable assumption?) If the document is created in LibreOffice, and it's expected to open in later versions of LibreOffice, hopefully the thousands-of-eyeballs will help keep the compatibility in line. I would also hope that since LibreOffice isn't chasing the almighty dollar, the people working on it wouldn't be so inclined to suddenly change things around in an attempt to appear as though they're really the kings of Office productivity. I figure that even if the backwards compatibility wasn't there, the original version of LO would still be around, capable of properly opening the format, and at least presenting the data the way it was intended. From there we would at least have the source code needed to properly translate into that non-obsolete format.
In short, I wouldn't bet on it because I trust OSS more than Microsoft to maintain data integrity.
The point wasn't about backwards compatibility. The point is that the source for LibreOffice will still be around. Will you be able to find a version of Office in 2030 that'll open a document created today? Personally, I wouldn't bet on it despite acknowledging the precedent you've described.
I have a question: Would it be possible to open the original app used to make that document back in 91? Would it require a VM?
Dagens Medicin, a news site for local and regional administrations, quotes Thomsen explaining that most of the hospital workers, doctors and nurses, will have little trouble using Libre Office. "Most of them do not need the advanced features of these suites."
More important than thatt, 20 years from now they'll be able to open the documents they create today.
Sony's PS3 is the 3rd fastest selling console in history - only the PS2 and Wii sold at a faster rate.. Take the fanboy goggles off and come join reality with the rest of us..
Settle down, he wasn't saying the PS3 wasn't a success, he was saying that the PS3 did not live up to Sony's expectations. Their strategy is to overload the hardware up front and take a loss on it, hoping it'll have a longer life cycle It worked really well for the PS2 and they've struggled with the PS3. It's nothing to take offense to.
Agreed. I have a GP2X Wiz with an OLED screen. Emulated games in particular look really nice, especially the old vector based games. They just don't look the same on an LCD.
I'd love to have one of these for retro gaming, mainly for the reason you stated.
One reply could have been "Did you know YouTube has playlists? If so, why isn't their solution good enough for you?"
If he had said "Are you aware that youtube has a playlist?" instead of calling you a noob, would you still have said "I'm aware of it. My answer is the same."?
Nope. I really am tired of the know-it-all attitude around here on Slashdot. Nobody ever really asks questions anymore, they just make statements. This means we have arguments instead of discussions. It's tiresome and quite obviously a ploy to get the word 'Insightful' to appear next to their posts.
Nobody is going to play 20 questions with you to figure out what the fuck you want us to ask you...
Uh huh. Given that you've already quoted the bit where he called me a n00b, this statement here makes me question who I'm really talking to.
"what's wrong with youtube's playlist?"
Thank you!
Youtube's "playlist" is just a list of videos. You can play with the order and that's about it. A music playlist, like one you use with Rhapsody, has tags for who made the song, where it came from, the genre, and all that jazz. It affects your music selection. Rhapsody, in particular, is nice in that you can mark songs you like with your own personal star rating. This makes it easier to, say, find a whole cache of music you might want to listen to, let it run through a few times, then tick them with a few stars to indicate that you like them.
The reason to use music-on-demand is not to maintain the library you have, but to find new stuff to make your library grow. YouTube is terrible for it and it's idea of a 'playlist' is a major inhibitor.
You might want to look into Rhapsody or Napster. I have accounts with both and they each have their pros and cons. I think Rhapsody's player, iPhone support, and search engine are better, but I like that Napster also gives you MP3 credits so you get song downloads, too.
To be honest, the most appealing thing about the music subscription for me (besides the instant access to virtually everything) is that I don't have to maintain a multi-gig collection of files anywhere. That's not for everybody but I fly around so many different machines it's worth it to me.
This story means that I'm going to recommend HTC phones over others to everyone I know, and buy them myself when I upgrade. Even if my friends/family don't unlock theirs, this news just gives me that much more trust in HTC hardware.
Fanboydom is bad, even if you're on the side of the righetous.
In reality it's quite wrong; Even ignoring the obvious creation tools such as Garage Band, a billion drawing programs and things like iMovie, there are so many word processors and note taking apps that people make heavy use of every day... when you can easily work on screen as it is, with a stylus, or with any USB or bluetooth keyboard why would the iPad not be a good solution for day to day note taking?
Speaking as an iPad owner and a content creator I really cannot say I agree. While true I have seen people create drawings and do some writing with iPads, I've yet to run across anybody who has really elevated that to a level of productivity.
I am happy with my iPad, it's useful to me (i.e. I'm more productive with it at work), but it is primarily a content consumption device.
I'm pretty sure we'd have seen just as much progress without them.
You don't think a company would be shy about spending say a billion dollars to develop a new gadget if a competitor could duplicate it and have it on shelves within a few months?
There's no such phrase as "case and point". What you're thinking of is "case in point", and providing a direct quote from an article covering the case already under consideration isn't, in fact, a case in point. It's just a quote.
*Beepbeebeeebeebeeepbeeepbeeepb*
Oops, sorry guys, I forgot to set my virgin-dar to vibrate.
Slashdot Mirror
Yep, you're right. I've just had my fill of combative statements. "Im going to assume you're a clueless moron, make a statement built on that premise, and even if you prove yourself I'll stick with it until the end."
It gets old. Im no saint, either.
Check my post here.
Ah.. well, yes, you have a darned good point there.
How about a world where people know how to use the apostrophe? Yeah, I believe we'll be able to build a Ringworld before that happens.
So you admit then that proper use of the apostrophe isn't holding back our progress as a civilization? ;)
I hear you, but i guess what it comes down to mainly is that fact that you shouldnt choose a editor today because of predictions set for 30 years from now. Sure, chose a format that balances future accessibility with immediate usability, but dont overestimate how easy format conversions are, both now and in the future.
Do you mean for individuals like me or you (or small businesses, etc...), or are we talking in the context of things like medical records where people live for 70+ years? The latter is where I'm coming from, if that helps explain my view. I wouldn't apply that philosophy for my own immediate needs.
Erm yeah, I was unclear. I haven't tried RIM's service. I'm a Rhapsody subscriber, their service is unlimited. Napster is like that, too. I can't imagine preferring the 50 song approach.
So . . .uh. . . why wouldn't you bet on it? A precedent has been set, but you choose to think that the open alternative will support more backward compatibility. . . why?
Well, for one thing, I'm not just talking about backwards compatibility, I'm talking about being able to open old files in the app they were originally written in. Now, I will concede right now that the latter isn't all that necessary if backwards compatibility is properly maintained and 100%. The only problem I have with 'bettin on it' is that I would genuinely be surprised if by 2030 the equivalent of LibreOffice will be able to properly open a doc I've written in the current version of Word today. I mean, if you follow all the b.s. surrounding reverse-engineerring of the .doc format, and trying to get OSS alternatives to open it, and Microsoft intentionally being a moving target, well personally that gives me pause for thought.
Hmm I'm not sure I'm clearly explaining myself here so I'll try another approach. Here's a few questions I have about the year 2030 and docs I've written today:
- Will Microsoft still be developing Office software in a form that we would find familiar today? (as opposed to going in a wild direction or dropping it altogether because competition has wiped them out?
- If Office 2030 is around, would a document open and look 100% correct? Will all its macros etc still run? (I mainly ask this because it sounds like MS would prefer to use JavaScript now, possibly so docs will work within a browser, too...)
- If Office 2030 isn't around, or if it doesn't properly open the files, will today's versions of Office be around? Will I be able to start them and open the doc through there?
- If Microsoft stopped developing Office, would they release the complete specification of the format?
- Would an alternative app be able to fire up this 20 year old doc and have it come up 100% correct?
In 20 years youll end up with a bunch of documents in an obsolete format. Congratulations, you have the source code that wrote them. Now all you will have to do is write you own converter.
Here's my thinking: Theoretically speaking, LibreOffice and its source code will be around in 2030. Even today's version of it. (Is this a reasonable assumption?) If the document is created in LibreOffice, and it's expected to open in later versions of LibreOffice, hopefully the thousands-of-eyeballs will help keep the compatibility in line. I would also hope that since LibreOffice isn't chasing the almighty dollar, the people working on it wouldn't be so inclined to suddenly change things around in an attempt to appear as though they're really the kings of Office productivity. I figure that even if the backwards compatibility wasn't there, the original version of LO would still be around, capable of properly opening the format, and at least presenting the data the way it was intended. From there we would at least have the source code needed to properly translate into that non-obsolete format.
In short, I wouldn't bet on it because I trust OSS more than Microsoft to maintain data integrity.
The point wasn't about backwards compatibility. The point is that the source for LibreOffice will still be around. Will you be able to find a version of Office in 2030 that'll open a document created today? Personally, I wouldn't bet on it despite acknowledging the precedent you've described.
I have a question: Would it be possible to open the original app used to make that document back in 91? Would it require a VM?
Dagens Medicin, a news site for local and regional administrations, quotes Thomsen explaining that most of the hospital workers, doctors and nurses, will have little trouble using Libre Office. "Most of them do not need the advanced features of these suites."
More important than thatt, 20 years from now they'll be able to open the documents they create today.
Sony's PS3 is the 3rd fastest selling console in history - only the PS2 and Wii sold at a faster rate.. Take the fanboy goggles off and come join reality with the rest of us..
Settle down, he wasn't saying the PS3 wasn't a success, he was saying that the PS3 did not live up to Sony's expectations. Their strategy is to overload the hardware up front and take a loss on it, hoping it'll have a longer life cycle It worked really well for the PS2 and they've struggled with the PS3. It's nothing to take offense to.
Agreed. I have a GP2X Wiz with an OLED screen. Emulated games in particular look really nice, especially the old vector based games. They just don't look the same on an LCD.
I'd love to have one of these for retro gaming, mainly for the reason you stated.
So what question did you want him to ask?
One reply could have been "Did you know YouTube has playlists? If so, why isn't their solution good enough for you?"
If he had said "Are you aware that youtube has a playlist?" instead of calling you a noob, would you still have said "I'm aware of it. My answer is the same."?
Nope. I really am tired of the know-it-all attitude around here on Slashdot. Nobody ever really asks questions anymore, they just make statements. This means we have arguments instead of discussions. It's tiresome and quite obviously a ploy to get the word 'Insightful' to appear next to their posts.
Nobody is going to play 20 questions with you to figure out what the fuck you want us to ask you...
Uh huh. Given that you've already quoted the bit where he called me a n00b, this statement here makes me question who I'm really talking to.
"what's wrong with youtube's playlist?"
Thank you!
Youtube's "playlist" is just a list of videos. You can play with the order and that's about it. A music playlist, like one you use with Rhapsody, has tags for who made the song, where it came from, the genre, and all that jazz. It affects your music selection. Rhapsody, in particular, is nice in that you can mark songs you like with your own personal star rating. This makes it easier to, say, find a whole cache of music you might want to listen to, let it run through a few times, then tick them with a few stars to indicate that you like them.
The reason to use music-on-demand is not to maintain the library you have, but to find new stuff to make your library grow. YouTube is terrible for it and it's idea of a 'playlist' is a major inhibitor.
Thanks for asking, have a nice weekend.
You might want to look into Rhapsody or Napster. I have accounts with both and they each have their pros and cons. I think Rhapsody's player, iPhone support, and search engine are better, but I like that Napster also gives you MP3 credits so you get song downloads, too.
To be honest, the most appealing thing about the music subscription for me (besides the instant access to virtually everything) is that I don't have to maintain a multi-gig collection of files anywhere. That's not for everybody but I fly around so many different machines it's worth it to me.
There is nothing for me to apologize for. You, however, are fighting to maintain your ignorance. That's not something to wear with pride.
It really is too hard to say "tell me more", isn't it?
That's funny in light of the accusation that I'm incapable of good social interaction.
This is where you should have asked for clarification and I would have been happy to have obliged. You would only have come out smarter.
I'm aware of it. My answer is the same. Did you know that use of question marks can lead to a better education?
I prefer having a playlist.
Subscribe to *music*? I don't think so.
It's audio-on-demand. There are definitely times where that is pretty slick.
This story means that I'm going to recommend HTC phones over others to everyone I know, and buy them myself when I upgrade. Even if my friends/family don't unlock theirs, this news just gives me that much more trust in HTC hardware.
Fanboydom is bad, even if you're on the side of the righetous.
In reality it's quite wrong; Even ignoring the obvious creation tools such as Garage Band, a billion drawing programs and things like iMovie, there are so many word processors and note taking apps that people make heavy use of every day... when you can easily work on screen as it is, with a stylus, or with any USB or bluetooth keyboard why would the iPad not be a good solution for day to day note taking?
Speaking as an iPad owner and a content creator I really cannot say I agree. While true I have seen people create drawings and do some writing with iPads, I've yet to run across anybody who has really elevated that to a level of productivity.
I am happy with my iPad, it's useful to me (i.e. I'm more productive with it at work), but it is primarily a content consumption device.
I'm pretty sure we'd have seen just as much progress without them.
You don't think a company would be shy about spending say a billion dollars to develop a new gadget if a competitor could duplicate it and have it on shelves within a few months?
In all fairness, Apple was going to turn up in this thread anyway. You lot cant' resist.
s/Cops/Bad Cops/
There _are_ good cops. They almost never make it into the news because that's just not the way news works, but they do exist.
No kidding. You'd think a site populated with Star-Trek-Loving-Nerds* would understand the problem with generalizations.
There's no such phrase as "case and point". What you're thinking of is "case in point", and providing a direct quote from an article covering the case already under consideration isn't, in fact, a case in point. It's just a quote.
*Beepbeebeeebeebeeepbeeepbeeepb*
Oops, sorry guys, I forgot to set my virgin-dar to vibrate.