You mean you want me to stop. The best way to deal with people's posts that you don't like is to get enough insightful posts that you get mod points and then do some moderation (within the bounds of what the moderation system was designed for). The other alternative is that you just don't read them. My best suggestion though would be to educate yourself on the era that brought us to where we are to day--learn history so you don't repeat it, so to speak. Another alternative is to move to digg.com.
I have been wondering, at least within the scope of this thread, whether there are a number of people that read Microsoft's retort to the NY Times article where they claimed Microsoft had never sufficiently overcome the stigma of the anti-trust case, and are now making a concerted effort on their behalf to assist. This is just a thought, not a conclusion, so do go a berserk on it, heh.
There's nothing wrong with my post. I lived through that era. Are you an employee of Microsoft? Are you a paid poster? Do you know you can be fined $10,000 for every infraction if you don't post that you are being paid to astroturf?
My comments are on point and apt. Clearly you might not understand what I'm writing and clearly from your other "troll" posts you are trolling.
The idiot argument isn't played much today in the OSS arena, and to think that the idiot argument is unique to Linux is to prove the idiot argument is sometimes apt. The reality of it is that the number of Windows users called idiots vastly exceeds the number of people being called idiots in OSS. Nowadays, if there are issues, it is the bug report trap hell moreso than the idiot accusation. The report trap hell is where you report a bug and it is immediately denied until someone confirms it then you are entitled to receive emails about that bug that you reported 9 months ago.
And to the graphics designer. Well, 70% of those using Photoshop haven't paid for the $700 program, thus showing why we need free software alternatives.
The accusation of the idiot claim in the OSS world is just an exaggeration of what used to happen long ago, only today it is used as a tool by those who have something to loose as OSS advances. Just as the bias of this blogger demonstrates.
Microsoft has 90% of the market because of what they did in the late 80s and though the 90s that resulted in them becoming a convicted criminal monopolist. Please read up on that era and watch how those things play into how software development is so complex that once you commit to one you will almost never put the resources into any other, even though they may be viable. Software today is not a democracy. It is a dictatorship. OSS is the only free choice you have. That's not an extreme view, that's the reality of developers, developers, developers.
OSS development works. Whatever happens it is adequate, even innovative. So his view doesn't seem to fit what has been working for OSS. You can only attribute that to bias. He's 100% biased and nothing he does or says can possibly matter.
It is not a web appliance. Web appliances have been tried in the past to dismal failure. This is a closed content delivery system that is a form of DRM for both content creator and consumer. It is a toy for Apple to gain content royalties like they do with Music. The type of product you speak of is unnecessary and won't result in your mother buying one. What will result in your mother buying one is you. You bring it to her attention, you recommend it, etc. Mother won't even consider it as it really doesn't do much to enhance her daily routine. Reading that romance novel in paperback or watching TV is what will maintain her routine (so to speak). She may buy it upon your recommendation but it will go by the wayside. I'm sure your mother doesn't carry around an ipod nor a kindle or anything like that. This is a product targeted at the first adopters of the Kindle. I would just love to have everyone stop spewing Apple's PR. This product isn't what you think it is nor will it be purchased by those you think. If it were a full fledged multitasking OS it might be suitable for a larger audience.
What he was saying about the reticence regarding the iPad is that prior to announcement of any product Apple is leak manipulated and after the announcement they are generally very open. In this case they are closed. I take it to mean that Jobs is miffed at all the negative publicity. So, he's going to add a camera and reduce the costs.
This isn't just a product tied to Apple's store. This is a general computing device like a netbook that is closed to ALL external content (including most amateur content (which 90% of the web is comprised of)), but that provided through Apple's store. Think about that.
"Your mom" so to speak has nothing to do with this product. It is not targeted at mom, the kids, or the grandparents. You keep trying to obfuscate the fact that this is about content. The device is just a secondary tool to make profit off the content. If you stop saying it is about mom and pop you will understand that better.
It is a false premise that it is a tool that keeps the family free of malicious software. The primary reason for this is to deliver content to the masses so that Apple can get a cut. I'm sure Apple has some guarantees out there to content creators that they'll be safe from copyright infringement--hence the strong threats toward anyone attempting to jailbreak the device.
Your mom will no more want one of these than any techy in the field. It has a very limited scope. Mom isn't going to carry it in her purse, she's not going to think it more than a TV and she is going to be upset when she can't do more than one thing or she finds big holes in her web pages. Certainly her paperback romance novels will be more suited to her routine than constantly worrying about if it is to bright, if it is charged, if she can this or that with it. Mom's old routine will win out. And mostly, it will be about us, yes us, because we influence the purchasing decisions of Mom and the rest of the family.
This device is targeted at everyone with early adoption by those who might have been inclined to purchase Amazon's Kindle.
Mom would want multitasking, she would want it because she already has it on her computer. She has it because the market drove us to it. She would want flash because flash exists because the market drove us to it. We drove the market to flash. Flash is a necessity, for the time being (maybe 5 years or so more). There's far too much investment in flash development in the effort to monetize advertising to just drop it. Jobs has to think us a fool when he gives the example of youtube. He must think we are a fool for taking it as if youtube is the only place that delivers quality content and he must snicker because the press bit the PR. The press is on their side because they have the potential of making money off the content provided through the closed device.
Apple is trying to do with content what Microsoft is trying to do with their gaming console and software developers.
It's a bigger cut for Apple to have the prices higher. It's a bruise for Amazon because they need lower prices to establish their store and technology as the primary method of delivering content.
Yes, it is a form of DRM for publishers and consumers. Apple is focused on a closed platform for delivering content. They want a cut of the sales. If they close it then they can make money from each sale. I get the feeling that if they could close the browser too and provide only content from the web through them and get paid for it they would.
Apple knew that Microsoft was targeting content with the DRM they put into Vista. About the time that Vista was released there was a tremendous outcry for the removal of DRM, as it hurts consumers. If you look at the closed environment you'll notice that it is, in a way DRM only it traps the content creators as well as the consumer.
When Vista was released Microsoft was after the content because they saw what Apple had done with iTunes and the iPod. They wanted to do the same thing with all other content. Imagine all content provided with DRM that would limit your consumption to Windows, which would stave off any migration to other OSes such as OSX and Linux. I expressed it back then as Microsoft foaming at the mouth over all the money they'd make off each piece of content, and the consumer would be trapped in Windows--yet another lock in technology, a building block of the lock in.
I'm sure Apple noticed this move and decided to follow the sentiment of removing DRM which would eventually thwart Microsoft's attempt at this DRM vendor lock in (as Apple would suffer as much as any non-Windows product). Think back to the "developers, developers, developers, developers...." rant by Steve Ballmer, yet replace the word "developer" with "content" and you'll see what I mean. Apple saw that with closed devices and content provided only through their product could they win that war, as Apple already had an established store, technology, and product in the hands of the consumer. This iPad product is no more than an extension of that idea.
I've been telling people forever that toolbars have only one purpose, which is to track. If you really think about it there are no real features of the toolbar other than tracking. Those buttons they add can easily be accomplished with the bookmarks toolbar shortcuts/bookmarks.
Somewhat rhetorical: What's the "other" purpose of having those toolbars? You get one for Microsoft, another for Yahoo, for Google, for Ask, etc., (makes me nauseous just to think about it).
Those toolbars are being installed into your browser by a number of products that have the option to install it by default such as the Java installer. As someone that cleans up a lot of computers every year in my shop to interrupt this process process is time consuming--to remove or disable them. Though it is time consuming I remove or disable them on almost every customer's computer that I work on. I then inform my customers of the purpose and consequences of the toolbars.
How much of this behavior is embedded in browsers provided by closed source vendors such as Microsoft? Do they track you and report back searches you do in Google to help them to gain a leg up on their searches? I've always wondered that.
We may not be the customer but we are the chosen consultants to the customer and hence our word speak loudest.
MP3s are fine. The only reason these entities are considering a replacement format is to combat piracy under the guise of added content which will most certainly result in ads, etc., within the files. If they aren't subtle they'll be blatant and annoying. This is an underhanded slimy attempt to control the public by the RIAA. The author of the format itself should be unbiased and disassociated yet that author isn't. Clearly he's under the influence of one fo the centuries worst entities, the RIAA.
The new format will fail, because we consultants to the customer will educate them.
Only one time have I read about someone inserting code that was malicious into the project. That code was automatically identified by the tools used to analyze it. As far as vulnerable, wall that's really a hype word used by neuroelectronic. What he believes is that the code just gets dumped into the kitty and is used automatically. No, it is not, it goes through a very thorough review process before it is even accepted, then it is edited to comply.
Wow that much activity from that many companies. 370 employees contributing!! Incredible the number of changes and the amount of code. This is tremendous. Open source success in this regard is truly fantastic.
You can't bitch about Linux having to use command line utilities and then at the same time bitch that windows users should. That's a double standard.
I believe both should be well adapted platforms that fully support command line utilities for anyone that wishes to use them, as I know, that command line utilities are a HUGE time saver and EASE OF USE feature. Nothing like spending more time looking for the graphical equivalent when you can easily accomplish the task with a command or two.
I am an advocate of GUIs. Don't even remotely believe that I am advocating command line environments. I am advocating using command line utilities when it is appropriate.
Problems with explorer.exe. No, not internet explorer. Their file manager has issues with selecting files where you could end up selecting files you didn't intend and having them be deleted as part of what you do. For instance, if you use the shift plus mouse click to select a range of files then choose to delete you might delete files you didn't want because the shift+click selected more or at least some that you didn't choose. The next normal step is to delete them, often without reviewing the names (since explorer.exe doesn't allow you to review the names--unlike dolphin in KDE which provides you a list of files it is going to delete before it deletes them).
So, be careful or you could wipe out a lot of important data inadvertently.
There are also problems with networking. After having Win7 on for a long time and having numerous computers access the files on the device over the network the computers network can begin to slow incredibly. For instance playing media files, one after another, after a long time the network connection can slow so bad that the media files begin to skip or break up thus causing artifacts on the screen. It only happens here under Win7, not Vista and not any Linux distro.
There is never a case that can be made in support for DRM, period. Only vendor lock in benefits. The consumer is almost always damaged by DRM, if not now, then in the near future.
I use linux on my main machine as my primary OS and when I click on a movie it plays. I don't search and tinker with codes or the right player. The right file. It all just works.
Linux is a huge time saver for me and a big budget saver as well.
My point is that you never give a programmer a screwdriver or a hammer. This is an old adage. Programmers tend to blame the computer or the user over obvious defects in their code.
As well, programmers should not be allowed to program willy nilly. You need someone to manage. It is obvious that the project was done by hackers as Dave Thomas has clearly stated they hired hackers to do the job.
The product shows obvious signs of issues where they let the programmer come up with the solution and the programmer bias exists en-mass. Portions need to be completely redone because they seriously lack ease of use features. Not to mention those mistakes are obvious deal breakers for consumers of an electronic appliance like Boxee's box by dlink.
So, please, no, the programmer should be coding what is designed and thus would not be solving the problem themselves.
As I said, I have used this for a long time and it is an Alpha product. Even their website still claims it is an alpha product.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean you want me to stop. The best way to deal with people's posts that you don't like is to get enough insightful posts that you get mod points and then do some moderation (within the bounds of what the moderation system was designed for). The other alternative is that you just don't read them. My best suggestion though would be to educate yourself on the era that brought us to where we are to day--learn history so you don't repeat it, so to speak. Another alternative is to move to digg.com.
I have been wondering, at least within the scope of this thread, whether there are a number of people that read Microsoft's retort to the NY Times article where they claimed Microsoft had never sufficiently overcome the stigma of the anti-trust case, and are now making a concerted effort on their behalf to assist. This is just a thought, not a conclusion, so do go a berserk on it, heh.
There's nothing wrong with my post. I lived through that era. Are you an employee of Microsoft? Are you a paid poster? Do you know you can be fined $10,000 for every infraction if you don't post that you are being paid to astroturf?
My comments are on point and apt. Clearly you might not understand what I'm writing and clearly from your other "troll" posts you are trolling.
The idiot argument isn't played much today in the OSS arena, and to think that the idiot argument is unique to Linux is to prove the idiot argument is sometimes apt. The reality of it is that the number of Windows users called idiots vastly exceeds the number of people being called idiots in OSS. Nowadays, if there are issues, it is the bug report trap hell moreso than the idiot accusation. The report trap hell is where you report a bug and it is immediately denied until someone confirms it then you are entitled to receive emails about that bug that you reported 9 months ago.
And to the graphics designer. Well, 70% of those using Photoshop haven't paid for the $700 program, thus showing why we need free software alternatives.
The accusation of the idiot claim in the OSS world is just an exaggeration of what used to happen long ago, only today it is used as a tool by those who have something to loose as OSS advances. Just as the bias of this blogger demonstrates.
Does a jailed inmate still consider himself free if he jailed in the US?
Microsoft has 90% of the market because of what they did in the late 80s and though the 90s that resulted in them becoming a convicted criminal monopolist. Please read up on that era and watch how those things play into how software development is so complex that once you commit to one you will almost never put the resources into any other, even though they may be viable. Software today is not a democracy. It is a dictatorship. OSS is the only free choice you have. That's not an extreme view, that's the reality of developers, developers, developers.
Most people know when software is free or not. Or rather, they know when they have to pay for software.
OSS development works. Whatever happens it is adequate, even innovative. So his view doesn't seem to fit what has been working for OSS. You can only attribute that to bias. He's 100% biased and nothing he does or says can possibly matter.
My only response has to be, must be, and is: it isn't going to work.
There's nothing new here. Too big to fail really doesn't apply. This sort of FUD has been spread time and again. Move on.
It is not a web appliance. Web appliances have been tried in the past to dismal failure. This is a closed content delivery system that is a form of DRM for both content creator and consumer. It is a toy for Apple to gain content royalties like they do with Music. The type of product you speak of is unnecessary and won't result in your mother buying one. What will result in your mother buying one is you. You bring it to her attention, you recommend it, etc. Mother won't even consider it as it really doesn't do much to enhance her daily routine. Reading that romance novel in paperback or watching TV is what will maintain her routine (so to speak). She may buy it upon your recommendation but it will go by the wayside. I'm sure your mother doesn't carry around an ipod nor a kindle or anything like that. This is a product targeted at the first adopters of the Kindle. I would just love to have everyone stop spewing Apple's PR. This product isn't what you think it is nor will it be purchased by those you think. If it were a full fledged multitasking OS it might be suitable for a larger audience.
What he was saying about the reticence regarding the iPad is that prior to announcement of any product Apple is leak manipulated and after the announcement they are generally very open. In this case they are closed. I take it to mean that Jobs is miffed at all the negative publicity. So, he's going to add a camera and reduce the costs.
This isn't just a product tied to Apple's store. This is a general computing device like a netbook that is closed to ALL external content (including most amateur content (which 90% of the web is comprised of)), but that provided through Apple's store. Think about that.
"Your mom" so to speak has nothing to do with this product. It is not targeted at mom, the kids, or the grandparents. You keep trying to obfuscate the fact that this is about content. The device is just a secondary tool to make profit off the content. If you stop saying it is about mom and pop you will understand that better.
It is a false premise that it is a tool that keeps the family free of malicious software. The primary reason for this is to deliver content to the masses so that Apple can get a cut. I'm sure Apple has some guarantees out there to content creators that they'll be safe from copyright infringement--hence the strong threats toward anyone attempting to jailbreak the device.
Your mom will no more want one of these than any techy in the field. It has a very limited scope. Mom isn't going to carry it in her purse, she's not going to think it more than a TV and she is going to be upset when she can't do more than one thing or she finds big holes in her web pages. Certainly her paperback romance novels will be more suited to her routine than constantly worrying about if it is to bright, if it is charged, if she can this or that with it. Mom's old routine will win out. And mostly, it will be about us, yes us, because we influence the purchasing decisions of Mom and the rest of the family.
This device is targeted at everyone with early adoption by those who might have been inclined to purchase Amazon's Kindle.
Mom would want multitasking, she would want it because she already has it on her computer. She has it because the market drove us to it. She would want flash because flash exists because the market drove us to it. We drove the market to flash. Flash is a necessity, for the time being (maybe 5 years or so more). There's far too much investment in flash development in the effort to monetize advertising to just drop it. Jobs has to think us a fool when he gives the example of youtube. He must think we are a fool for taking it as if youtube is the only place that delivers quality content and he must snicker because the press bit the PR. The press is on their side because they have the potential of making money off the content provided through the closed device.
Apple is trying to do with content what Microsoft is trying to do with their gaming console and software developers.
It's a bigger cut for Apple to have the prices higher. It's a bruise for Amazon because they need lower prices to establish their store and technology as the primary method of delivering content.
Yes, it is a form of DRM for publishers and consumers. Apple is focused on a closed platform for delivering content. They want a cut of the sales. If they close it then they can make money from each sale. I get the feeling that if they could close the browser too and provide only content from the web through them and get paid for it they would.
Apple knew that Microsoft was targeting content with the DRM they put into Vista. About the time that Vista was released there was a tremendous outcry for the removal of DRM, as it hurts consumers. If you look at the closed environment you'll notice that it is, in a way DRM only it traps the content creators as well as the consumer.
When Vista was released Microsoft was after the content because they saw what Apple had done with iTunes and the iPod. They wanted to do the same thing with all other content. Imagine all content provided with DRM that would limit your consumption to Windows, which would stave off any migration to other OSes such as OSX and Linux. I expressed it back then as Microsoft foaming at the mouth over all the money they'd make off each piece of content, and the consumer would be trapped in Windows--yet another lock in technology, a building block of the lock in.
I'm sure Apple noticed this move and decided to follow the sentiment of removing DRM which would eventually thwart Microsoft's attempt at this DRM vendor lock in (as Apple would suffer as much as any non-Windows product). Think back to the "developers, developers, developers, developers...." rant by Steve Ballmer, yet replace the word "developer" with "content" and you'll see what I mean. Apple saw that with closed devices and content provided only through their product could they win that war, as Apple already had an established store, technology, and product in the hands of the consumer. This iPad product is no more than an extension of that idea.
It does not multitask. Enough said.
I've been telling people forever that toolbars have only one purpose, which is to track. If you really think about it there are no real features of the toolbar other than tracking. Those buttons they add can easily be accomplished with the bookmarks toolbar shortcuts/bookmarks.
Somewhat rhetorical: What's the "other" purpose of having those toolbars? You get one for Microsoft, another for Yahoo, for Google, for Ask, etc., (makes me nauseous just to think about it).
Those toolbars are being installed into your browser by a number of products that have the option to install it by default such as the Java installer. As someone that cleans up a lot of computers every year in my shop to interrupt this process process is time consuming--to remove or disable them. Though it is time consuming I remove or disable them on almost every customer's computer that I work on. I then inform my customers of the purpose and consequences of the toolbars.
How much of this behavior is embedded in browsers provided by closed source vendors such as Microsoft? Do they track you and report back searches you do in Google to help them to gain a leg up on their searches? I've always wondered that.
We may not be the customer but we are the chosen consultants to the customer and hence our word speak loudest.
MP3s are fine. The only reason these entities are considering a replacement format is to combat piracy under the guise of added content which will most certainly result in ads, etc., within the files. If they aren't subtle they'll be blatant and annoying. This is an underhanded slimy attempt to control the public by the RIAA. The author of the format itself should be unbiased and disassociated yet that author isn't. Clearly he's under the influence of one fo the centuries worst entities, the RIAA.
The new format will fail, because we consultants to the customer will educate them.
Never was never used, hehe.
Only one time have I read about someone inserting code that was malicious into the project. That code was automatically identified by the tools used to analyze it. As far as vulnerable, wall that's really a hype word used by neuroelectronic. What he believes is that the code just gets dumped into the kitty and is used automatically. No, it is not, it goes through a very thorough review process before it is even accepted, then it is edited to comply.
That's just FUD on your part dude.
In a good way.
Wow that much activity from that many companies. 370 employees contributing!! Incredible the number of changes and the amount of code. This is tremendous. Open source success in this regard is truly fantastic.
You can't bitch about Linux having to use command line utilities and then at the same time bitch that windows users should. That's a double standard.
I believe both should be well adapted platforms that fully support command line utilities for anyone that wishes to use them, as I know, that command line utilities are a HUGE time saver and EASE OF USE feature. Nothing like spending more time looking for the graphical equivalent when you can easily accomplish the task with a command or two.
I am an advocate of GUIs. Don't even remotely believe that I am advocating command line environments. I am advocating using command line utilities when it is appropriate.
Problems with explorer.exe. No, not internet explorer. Their file manager has issues with selecting files where you could end up selecting files you didn't intend and having them be deleted as part of what you do. For instance, if you use the shift plus mouse click to select a range of files then choose to delete you might delete files you didn't want because the shift+click selected more or at least some that you didn't choose. The next normal step is to delete them, often without reviewing the names (since explorer.exe doesn't allow you to review the names--unlike dolphin in KDE which provides you a list of files it is going to delete before it deletes them).
So, be careful or you could wipe out a lot of important data inadvertently.
There are also problems with networking. After having Win7 on for a long time and having numerous computers access the files on the device over the network the computers network can begin to slow incredibly. For instance playing media files, one after another, after a long time the network connection can slow so bad that the media files begin to skip or break up thus causing artifacts on the screen. It only happens here under Win7, not Vista and not any Linux distro.
There is never a case that can be made in support for DRM, period. Only vendor lock in benefits. The consumer is almost always damaged by DRM, if not now, then in the near future.
I use linux on my main machine as my primary OS and when I click on a movie it plays. I don't search and tinker with codes or the right player. The right file. It all just works.
Linux is a huge time saver for me and a big budget saver as well.
My point is that you never give a programmer a screwdriver or a hammer. This is an old adage. Programmers tend to blame the computer or the user over obvious defects in their code.
As well, programmers should not be allowed to program willy nilly. You need someone to manage. It is obvious that the project was done by hackers as Dave Thomas has clearly stated they hired hackers to do the job.
The product shows obvious signs of issues where they let the programmer come up with the solution and the programmer bias exists en-mass. Portions need to be completely redone because they seriously lack ease of use features. Not to mention those mistakes are obvious deal breakers for consumers of an electronic appliance like Boxee's box by dlink.
So, please, no, the programmer should be coding what is designed and thus would not be solving the problem themselves.
As I said, I have used this for a long time and it is an Alpha product. Even their website still claims it is an alpha product.
They support OpenGL unless it is on Windows, then it is DX9, or some variation of it.