Your analogy doesn't hold up. Windows itself might be closed source, but it runs open source software just fine.
Please, tell me which standards Windows doesn't support. Let me guess, you're gonna run off at the mouth about Office not supporting ODF? IE not being standards compliant? What this has to do with Windows itself, I don't know. Last I checked, OOO and Firefox (or chrome, Opera, Safari... the list goes on) run great on Windows.
Second, one of the best ways to weaken IE is to weaken Windows - the less people running Windows, the less run IE.
I don't think google has any ill will toward Windows itself. They could care less what the desktop OS is. They just want better standards compliance in IE, because much of their development time must be spent on IE 6 ports of their product.
Why would they have to do that? It seems like they'd gain more fans and get continued community support by not-forking.
/quote>
Linux is controlled chaos. It is a million different pieces written by different people all over the world and put together to create a fully functioning desktop operating system. While this is cool in its own right, there is no single mindset or direction. IMO, to truly be successful there needs to be a "dictator" for lack of a better term who has the right vision. It would be necessary to have a fully cohesive system.
Even if linux had an equal market share to Windows, it would still be far more difficult to develop for. Which window manager are we using? Which sound library? Which directory layout? Which [insert library that has a zillion different implentations]? "Linux Desktop" implies very very little, whereas "Windows XP SP2" or "OS X 10.5" tells you everything you need to know regarding what stack you're developing for. Even if the market share were equal, it would not be cost effective to develop for Linux, not to mention support.
I don't know if this is what HP is speculated to be doing, but if Linux were to ever be successful as a desktop OS, they would need to do the following:
Determine which components are going to be part of the system.
Fork every single one of them.
Tightly integrate them
Do not call it a "distro" but rather a "linux based desktop OS."
Brand it without the word "linux"
If desktop linux is ever to be successful, there needs to be a standard and tightly integrated stack. The choice and openness that makes linux so great in the eyes of some is it's bane in the desktop market, and for software support as well.
The X-Wing games were awesome. It's been almost 10 years since the last one came out. If there's any winning formula to revive, it would be that series. I can't even imagine what they could do with that game on today's hardware...
Well, besides porting the game itself, something relatively trivial such as an installation program has to be maintained for a good number of distros and packaging systems. Then you'd have to support them all.
In the end, it's hard to deny that the platform with the smallest market share will require the biggest investment in time and it's just not worth it.
The Linux community feels like they get the shaft when it comes to support, but they ask for it. Seriously, what does it mean to "support" linux? You mean, "support the Linux kernel and the million variants of desktop distributions that exist." I couldn't imagine why they wouldn't....
I started reading your post, and the Mac vs PC ad music started playing in my head.
Then PC guy asks Mac guy what he's playing over there.
Mac guy responds, "Oregon Trail, it's totally awesome!"
PC guy says "Oh really? I'm playing all the new 3d games. In spite of your lame attempts to undermine me by beating old perceptions like a dead horse, I still hold a significant market share over you. As such, nobody wants to support you. Sure, you're popular among trendy college students with rich parents, but you'll eventually be sold when they drop out of school because they spend too much time on digg. "
Mac guy starts crying.
PC Guy: "I'm sorry, that was a little harsh."
Mac Guy: "No, it's not you. Alice died of tuberculosis."
> I'm not even gonna try it. > The features in FF are so good IMO that I don't even want to 'try' Chrome to see what it is like. > Firefox as won, the others just don't yet realize it. > Yes, I realize that I sound like a FF fanboi, but this is not so.
Riiiight. I don't usually trash other folks posts, but how this garbage scored +5, insightful is beyond me. This was probably the least insightful thing I've ever read. I've had more insightful and compelling literary experiences reading random youtube comments. But I digress.
I don't get the adblock argument. Chrome is open source and has plugin support. Did you expect google to subvert their customers by creating the plugin THEMSELVES? I give it less than a week before an adblock equivalent is released for chrome.
I've done just about everything under the sun while under its influence, including competitive sports, intense workout, programming, homework, etc. The effects can be distracting if you're not used to them, especially when smoking potent stuff. If you can get past that though, I think it does give some competitive advantages in certain contexts.
One thing in particular I've noticed is that it puts you more in touch with your body, if you work out it is known as a mind-muscle connection.
The other thing is gives you the ability to focus more mental energy on a particular task (while at the same time taking away your ability to multitask). I could see how this would boost performance in some games, but certainly not in others.
And no, it doesn't make the game more real, or dreamy, or anything like that.
Jobs already is turning Apple into another Microsoft. Releasing buggy OS's, vulnerabilities, vendor lockdown, bait and switches, etc. Apple fanatics will vehemently deny all these things, because they perceive Apple as being perfect. Once Steve Jobs is gone, their perception will change, even though business practices and company direction likely will not.
I will give Steve Jobs credit though. He is a marketing genius. He understands presentation. This is what got Apple back on track, and unless somebody comes and completely derails Apple, they will do just fine.
I'm doing all sorts of fancy UI stuff with jQuery, all cross browser compatible. And notice I said it "best supports Java code on the server side," not exclusively Java on the server side. Being able to pass java objects in pseudo-native fashion with all serialization and whatnot being done behind the scenes is a very nice feature, and was one of the things they were selling the platform on when I got started in it.
I should clarify regarding deploying. If you are deploying strictly html/generated javascript, it is trivial. Not so much when it involves making it play nicely with a Java backend in a deployed state.
GWT is cool once you get started, but eventually familiarity breeds contempt. The issues that always bothered me were the following:
Any UI toolkit is going to limit customization of the UI to an extent.
The javascript is generated from Java code on the client side, and best supports Java code on the server side. This presents two issues:
Good luck finding a cheap Java host
You are tempted to use cool things like Hibernate, which presents a problem when entities are being passed to what is ultimately javascript code.
Deploying was always a bitch
Writing a webapp in a statically typed language seemed.... wrong.
I ultimately scrapped this project and started it over using another google product, Google App Engine. All client side stuff is done using jQuery, it gave me an excuse to learn python which I absolutely love. And, GAE has the specific goal of making it easy to deploy and scale the application, which was always something I had dreaded even thinking of.
Slashdot Mirror
Your analogy doesn't hold up. Windows itself might be closed source, but it runs open source software just fine.
Please, tell me which standards Windows doesn't support. Let me guess, you're gonna run off at the mouth about Office not supporting ODF? IE not being standards compliant? What this has to do with Windows itself, I don't know. Last I checked, OOO and Firefox (or chrome, Opera, Safari... the list goes on) run great on Windows.
Second, one of the best ways to weaken IE is to weaken Windows - the less people running Windows, the less run IE.
I don't think google has any ill will toward Windows itself. They could care less what the desktop OS is. They just want better standards compliance in IE, because much of their development time must be spent on IE 6 ports of their product.
Why would they have to do that? It seems like they'd gain more fans and get continued community support by not-forking.
/quote> Linux is controlled chaos. It is a million different pieces written by different people all over the world and put together to create a fully functioning desktop operating system. While this is cool in its own right, there is no single mindset or direction. IMO, to truly be successful there needs to be a "dictator" for lack of a better term who has the right vision. It would be necessary to have a fully cohesive system.
Even if linux had an equal market share to Windows, it would still be far more difficult to develop for. Which window manager are we using? Which sound library? Which directory layout? Which [insert library that has a zillion different implentations]? "Linux Desktop" implies very very little, whereas "Windows XP SP2" or "OS X 10.5" tells you everything you need to know regarding what stack you're developing for. Even if the market share were equal, it would not be cost effective to develop for Linux, not to mention support.
If desktop linux is ever to be successful, there needs to be a standard and tightly integrated stack. The choice and openness that makes linux so great in the eyes of some is it's bane in the desktop market, and for software support as well.
The X-Wing games were awesome. It's been almost 10 years since the last one came out. If there's any winning formula to revive, it would be that series. I can't even imagine what they could do with that game on today's hardware...
Well, besides porting the game itself, something relatively trivial such as an installation program has to be maintained for a good number of distros and packaging systems. Then you'd have to support them all.
In the end, it's hard to deny that the platform with the smallest market share will require the biggest investment in time and it's just not worth it.
The Linux community feels like they get the shaft when it comes to support, but they ask for it. Seriously, what does it mean to "support" linux? You mean, "support the Linux kernel and the million variants of desktop distributions that exist." I couldn't imagine why they wouldn't....
I started reading your post, and the Mac vs PC ad music started playing in my head.
Then PC guy asks Mac guy what he's playing over there.
Mac guy responds, "Oregon Trail, it's totally awesome!"
PC guy says "Oh really? I'm playing all the new 3d games. In spite of your lame attempts to undermine me by beating old perceptions like a dead horse, I still hold a significant market share over you. As such, nobody wants to support you. Sure, you're popular among trendy college students with rich parents, but you'll eventually be sold when they drop out of school because they spend too much time on digg. "
Mac guy starts crying.
PC Guy: "I'm sorry, that was a little harsh."
Mac Guy: "No, it's not you. Alice died of tuberculosis."
Cue Mac VS PC ending jingle.
No, absolutely not.
It's required for the XUL based interface?
He tried to create a phallic looking creature.
Still blows my mind that so few people know about httpS://thepiratebay.org....
> I'm not even gonna try it.
> The features in FF are so good IMO that I don't even want to 'try' Chrome to see what it is like.
> Firefox as won, the others just don't yet realize it.
> Yes, I realize that I sound like a FF fanboi, but this is not so.
Riiiight. I don't usually trash other folks posts, but how this garbage scored +5, insightful is beyond me. This was probably the least insightful thing I've ever read. I've had more insightful and compelling literary experiences reading random youtube comments. But I digress.
I don't get the adblock argument. Chrome is open source and has plugin support. Did you expect google to subvert their customers by creating the plugin THEMSELVES? I give it less than a week before an adblock equivalent is released for chrome.
Perceived console exclusivity == more hardware sales. That's really all there is to this.
I've done just about everything under the sun while under its influence, including competitive sports, intense workout, programming, homework, etc. The effects can be distracting if you're not used to them, especially when smoking potent stuff. If you can get past that though, I think it does give some competitive advantages in certain contexts.
One thing in particular I've noticed is that it puts you more in touch with your body, if you work out it is known as a mind-muscle connection.
The other thing is gives you the ability to focus more mental energy on a particular task (while at the same time taking away your ability to multitask). I could see how this would boost performance in some games, but certainly not in others.
And no, it doesn't make the game more real, or dreamy, or anything like that.
>>it could spell the end of Apple.
And then Microsoft would hire the Mac vs PC guys, and have office guy head butt hip mac guy while screaming "What now, bitch?!"
Makes me want to whack some crazy Apple fanboy with a one-button mouse while they're down.
You're xbox gamr thing is just a sterotype, idio.t
...For not magically installing a chip on the motherboard of users clamoring for instant-on technology.
And in the event that MS implements "awake from internet message" technology -- Slashdot headline of the day:
"Microsoft introduces glaring security exploit as 'feature'"
Tags: haha, m$, defectivebydesign
This is true - But they also started a social revolution by doing drugs and having lots of sex. You might want to reconsider your question.
Jobs already is turning Apple into another Microsoft. Releasing buggy OS's, vulnerabilities, vendor lockdown, bait and switches, etc. Apple fanatics will vehemently deny all these things, because they perceive Apple as being perfect. Once Steve Jobs is gone, their perception will change, even though business practices and company direction likely will not.
I will give Steve Jobs credit though. He is a marketing genius. He understands presentation. This is what got Apple back on track, and unless somebody comes and completely derails Apple, they will do just fine.
Regardless of health related issues, second hand smoke is annoying and disgusting if you do not smoke yourself.
I'm doing all sorts of fancy UI stuff with jQuery, all cross browser compatible. And notice I said it "best supports Java code on the server side," not exclusively Java on the server side. Being able to pass java objects in pseudo-native fashion with all serialization and whatnot being done behind the scenes is a very nice feature, and was one of the things they were selling the platform on when I got started in it.
I should clarify regarding deploying. If you are deploying strictly html/generated javascript, it is trivial. Not so much when it involves making it play nicely with a Java backend in a deployed state.
I ultimately scrapped this project and started it over using another google product, Google App Engine. All client side stuff is done using jQuery, it gave me an excuse to learn python which I absolutely love. And, GAE has the specific goal of making it easy to deploy and scale the application, which was always something I had dreaded even thinking of.