If software developers actually wrote and deployed their applications correctly a lot of whats broken in Windows would actually be fixed!
This is not to say that Windows does not have problems, it has TONS of them, but many many of them would be resolved if the idiots actually wrote applications that did not:
Put their data files in "/program files".
Fail to set the correct rights to the registry keys they create on install.
Require "power user" or above permissions.
Scatter their damn DLL's all over the fucking hard drive, then rely on the OS to track them down and do the loading for them instead of keeping them with their main executable and loading and unloading them explicitly with their program.
Put all sorts of shit in the system or system32 directory.
That is but a tiny sample of the brain dead shit that application programmers do which in turn causes all sorts of chaos in windows. YES Microsfot did build a whole shit load of supidity into Windows but the people who write software for it are even worse since they simple never do it correctly.
Yeah I know, what a horrible opening, but it really applies.
Think about the utter simplicity and beauty of the equation of E=MC^2.
Read a "Brief History of Time" cover to cover about 10 times but don't try to dig into what he is saying, take it on face value, because he is explaining it, you just have let it sink in.
What will really bake your noodle is when you realize that everything has infinite energy.
I have tried them all and except for IFR (and that is not even that good, but passable, barely ) practice they do a poor job.
And yes, I am a pilot.
I have yet to use one that accurately reflects the maneuvering and performance of a real airplane, not even a Cessna 152 much less a hi performance prop plane like a Mooney or a Bonanza.
I think the basic problem is they but way to much work into "pretty" and not enough work into actual flight dynamics. I will admit that it is hard work to accurately capture that data and for how far they have come they deserve a great deal of credit but they all end being way to much like a video game. Perhaps placing a 4 axis set of accelerometers, control position and rate of control input senors, and engine sensors and recording that data while a plane does maneuvers would help. If someone could come up with the equipment I would be happy to burn a few hours in the air doing all the basic stuff and a few things close to the edge of the envelope to help them work on that particular problem.
An exit relay is the final relay that Tor traffic passes through before it reaches its destination. Exit relays advertise their presence to the entire Tor network, so they can be used by any Tor users. Because Tor traffic exits through these relays, the IP address of the exit relay is interpreted as the source of the traffic. If a malicious user employs the Tor network to do something that might be objectionable or illegal, the exit relay may take the blame. People who run exit relays should be prepared to deal with complaints, copyright takedown notices, and the possibility that their servers may attract the attention of law enforcement agencies. If you aren't prepared to deal with potential issues like this, you might want to run a middle relay instead. We recommend that an exit relay should be operated on a dedicated machine in a hosting facility that is aware that the server is running an exit node. The Tor Project blog has these excellent tips for running an exit relay. See our legal FAQ on Tor for more info.
I applaud those who do this but sadly they will be taken advantage of for illegal purposes and therefor the operators are at risk.
In other posts people suggest that ISP's should suffer the same fate but don't are reminded of the "Common Carrier" law. If these individuals were to set them selves up as a common carrier I wonder if they would realize the same protections. Given that those with CC protection do in fact cooperate with LE would that then make them obliged to do so?
If programming were easy everyone could do it. Well it is... Sorta... and everyone can sorta do it they all just can't do it correctly and well.
Yup dealing with those is a PITA but you knew the job was dangerous when you took it aye?
For years I have used the same bit of code to open and close files, streams, etc. One function to open one function to close and they have yet to fail me. The logic for opening is pretty simple, if you can't open it you report back and in certain very specific instances you have to bail out with a meaningful error message. Closing is pretty straight forward as well. If you cant release a resource ( close a file or what not ) then something is pretty drastically wrong and again time to bail out meaningful error message instead of a couple hundred lines of java stack trace which is practically meaningless to the end user.
I guess you think it stylish to use profanity, but since you are posting as AC I suppose you can get away with that.
Advancements in given programming language are great, advancements that encourage both laziness and a lack of attention to detail are worthless.
Is this what we have come to? Writing languages where programmer laziness and lack of attention to detail is heralded as the next great thing?
Someone mentioned programmers saying "High Level Languages" replacing assembler is bad? No that is not bad, it is a better means of programming when absolute metal level control is not required.
NO STATEMENT I MADE even attempted to assign any attribute to myself resembling anything like or even alluding to perfection.
Was it a true error of units that sent a billion dollar spacecraft into the surface of mars or was it someone who replied on the framework or the RTL working all that out for them? Could one ascribe that oversight as a lack of attention to detail? I think so, but that is just my opinion for whatever someone else things its worth.
It wasn't as if moving from assembler to C required less attention to detail, it simply made writing the code easier to understand 6 months later and took care of the really really love level things for you.
I have found many many bugs in my own code where I forgot to close a file before exiting and have lost data because the files contents were not flushed to disk and then properly closed and I found those bugs and fixed them before the code went out my door.
How much more will we push Moore's Law by adding yet more and more and more code to do things we as programmers should just remember to do? At what point will it take a machine with two quad core processors and 12 gigs of ram to run a simple program? Is there no limit to the lengths that we will go to take up the slack for basic laziness and lack of attention to detail so that some slack jaw can write code that will work to say nothing of having excellent performance?
Vernon D. Buerg (rip) wrote fast tiny programs that did big jobs and he did it elegantly. I shudder to think what kind of monster it would take to duplicate even LIST in Java.
M point is this. Programming takes attention to detail, it takes concentration, it takes keeping track of what you use and giving it back when you are done with it, not just skipping on to the next thing and saying "The RTL will take care of that, no need to waist my time on doing things like that.".
And yeah I have been around for a long time and I can tell by some of the low ID's replying that some of you have been around for a while as well and could see where you want to forget as many of the details as you can because of deadlines and this that or the other. Yet at the same time I see those same low ID numbers bitch and moan about bad code, programs that just blow up when you least expect it. When you bitch about that look in the mirror and tell yourself that you asked for it because you did when you advocate for things that are just automatic because really when you think about it there is not much in this world that works well 100% of the time automatically.
He might not have the umph left to go and run the company day-to-day but he will be Chairman of the Board and will be the man behind the man, guiding, advising, teaching, mentoring and unless the guy drops dead in the next few weeks Apple will continue to be the innovator that it has been with him at the helm and perhaps even if he does it will still be.
When Steve dies, there will be a marble statue of him at the front door of Apple and Woz will put it up.
Wow, you are way out of touch. My pal the insurance adjuster has an Ipad II and he rarely if ever touches a PC now except for gaming and watching porn at home. The camera takes all the pictures he needs and can record in both video and audio if required, the browser pulls up all the parts information he needs, the app on it allows him to complete the claim ON-SITE with a BT Keyboard for faster typing ( he has fat fingers ) AND submit it from the body shop or the customers house.
The iPad is the perfect tool for our times. Everything is client / server and that works great because it is a cellular data stream, with wifi backup. It is slick, it can be locked down by the issuer with their applications installed and can be updated over the wire.
No, you can't re-compile the linux kernel on it but that is not what it was designed for. It was designed to to what it does and it does that better then anything out there. I doubt Android will ever take market from it simply because Apple holds the keys to the kingdom and that makes sure that it is the same interface for one to the other, use 1 iDevice and you have used them all and that is the point. It is like windows in a way just one hell of a lot cooler and a lot more useful for the things it was designed for. It is elegant, useful, and it serves the Apple total user experience that people have become accustomed to and that can't be beat.
Project Coin's diamond syntax for constructor calls lets the compiler infer type arguments, and the try-with-resources statement helps the compiler make reliable code by automatically closing files, sockets, and database connections when developers forget to do this, Ratcliff says: "That's something that's been tripping up developers -- especially young developers -- for years. That'll be a good productivity improvement and will reduce bugs."
I mean if that doesn't say it all I don't know what does. Hmm Allocate a resource, Free a resource. I think they still teach that in CS-101, then again maybe not. I alloc() therefor I free() ?".
You don't have to take a binary, you can take pure text that is easily parsed and controlled. eg:
objectMyMainForm : TForm
left = 100
top = 100
width = 400
height = 200
caption = 'Application One'
color = clBtnFace
font.charset = DEFAULT_CHARSET
font.color = clWindowText
font.height = -11
font.name = 'arial'
font.style = []
PixelsPerInch = 96
TextHeight = 14 object MyButton : tbutton
left = 10
top = 10
width = 40
height = 20
caption = 'Do It Now!'
onClick = MyButtonClick end end
So above is one of many ways you can use the very text generated by the form designer, in this case I chose Dephi but it could be any form design tool, and that is parsed and each object instantiated. Because the button control is created within the form object we know who its owner is and in automatically inherits many of the properties of the parent ( in this case the main form ) so you can be as explicit as you like or not.
Since each of these are based upon native controls the creation is pretty much instant. Since this is just text it can be compressed and encrypted and then can be examined one the "browser" side.
The only thing you have to do is create an interpreter to handle this events. The language could be JavaScript, Pascal, Python, C or pretty much any oter language you wanted to use ( Hell make up your own ) and there are lots of FOOS interpreters out there.
RAD tools like Delphi, Power Builder, etc already have data aware controls like grids, Up Down Rollers, Pick Lists etc and pre-built methods that handle 90% of what you need to do so I don't think it is a very big stretch to make this paradigm a working viable method for application delivery since there are x-plat versions of things like QT and the like that would make this method completely useable on Windows, Linux and Mac
This will fail over time but it will fail. We can only hope it fails sooner rather then later.
The idiocy of mixing a layout specification with code is going to open us up to more and more interesting types of viri and malware.
Remember CORBA? It has never seen the light of day in any serious way. It WAS a great idea.
Why have we not learned that a layout engine is most assuredly not the right tool for the job? The amount of hacks and just plain insanity you have to go through just to get thinks to work from one browser to another is starting to make lots and lots of people just go dust off their RAD tools, eg: Delphi, Power Builder, etc and just write the damn app and call it a day.
At some point the browser will have to be so huge to support the never ending flow of committee designed API's that they will make MS-Access look like a memory efficient application.
Applications are not documents and the browser needs to get back to doing document presentation and we need to build application processor that takes in application specifications and then runs them because trying to do both has been, is and will forever be a fucking mess.
First you have to find a lawyer who is willing to work on the assumption that you will win and get costs and normal and customer fees.
If you cant you will need to take out a second on your house ( if you have any equity left after the housing collapse ) and hire a pretty good lawyer at around 250.00 to 300.00 per hour and at that rate the bill adds up mighty damn fast, even in Texas.
The very first thing that is going to happen is that the plaintiff is going to avalanche you with paper and court appearances because they have the deep pockets and you will find your pockets with holes in them in a big hurry AND you have to start making payments on the money your having to borrow against your house. You cant keep that up for long and they will just keep pounding away.
The legal system is tilted directly in favor of those with deep pockets. And while you might prevail you will more then likely go broke in the process. And court costs and lawyers fees wont make up for the mental hell you and your family will go through in the process
The "free market" is taking care of those who can afford to defend themselves. So this free market you espouse takes care of those with wealth and everyone else gets fucked up the ass and has no recourse. Sounds a lot like the Mortgage backed Securities disaster.
I know you posted as AC but I also know you are reading this.
Indeed, ONLY your COMPLETE source code would be patentable. Anything you only have binary images for from a THIRD PARTY read that as closed source drivers, microcode binaries, obj files, RTL's etc SHALL be specifically and obviously noted in your source code with reference in comments as to the copyright holder.
Look & Feel would not be copyrightable in any way shape or form, nor would they be patentable.
Copyright would be be for 10 years, renewable one time for 5 additional years.
That means we have to define what to do about any software that has versions. Is the (c) only good for the original, or the patched version? If you have a version 1.0 of a software title, when you patch it to 1.5 is that the original version or is it a new version? If it is the original version and through the years you have gone from ( for sake of argument ) Windows XP, Windows XP 1.5, Windows XP 2.0, Windows XP 3.0 then does the original copyright of Windows XP 1.0 ( lets say 1/1/90 ) that expires 1/1/2000 with the possibility of being extended until 1/1/2005 or does each succeeding version have to be re-filed with the time frame obviously being extended from the data of publication of the latest.x version?
The Source Code has to be filed with the Office of copyright in a human readable form and the media on which it is filed must last the life of the copyright grant..
The ONLY things that should be patentable are physical devices.
ANYTHING other then that is covered by copyright.
You come up with a fancy new IC that increases radio reception by 10 fold, it is a physical device and can therefor be patented and under your control and you will sell them by the truck load or license the manufacture of the device and collect royalties. The WORLD will beat a path to your door trying to get it. Some companies will offer you huge sums for an exclusive license.
Software patents on the other hand are ludicrous on their face. You say you have a patent on Linked Lists? Well you pretty much own ALL software EVERYWHERE no matter who wrote the linked list code, no matter the language. That is wrong.
If your code is copyrighted then NO ONE ELSE can use YOUR code that YOU wrote and this is where some fools think that patents should apply since you wrote code that does compression very very well and you can reduce the OED to 10,000 bytes. Well sorry dude I can write that 10% better but using pretty much the same Linked Lists and compression algorithms, but I found a way to fold constants better then you did and my code is better, but it is not YOUR code, it is MY code and I copyrighted it IN TOTAL as a body of work that has a beginning and end end, as does yours but they are different works just like two books about the same subject are two different works that lead to the same conclusion.
Even modern operating systems are largely written in HLLs
I guess you consider C a High Level Language. I think a LOT of people would seriously disagree with you.
I don't care what OS you are using. Those are written in C and Assembler. Look HERE for yourself.
You are not going to find any php, python, java, perl, ruby etc. etc. there, not a line of it.
Mostly your comments are pointless. Most really "good" HTML is still written by hand. It may get spewed from some content management system, but who do you think wrote all the HTML and CSS for those? Do you think JOOMLA magically coughed it up?
I normally do not reply to AC but I hope you actually read this and get the hell out of the basement now and then.
Contrary to popular belief building native code apps is quite alive and well. It is faster and when built with.net ( I don't like it but have to respect it for what it is AND what it can do ) but it runs on any windows platform from XP on client AND server and has every hook built in for database work AND has data aware grid controls.
The web browser in its current incarnation is a MAJOR PITA to do serious work with requires VAST amounts of backend server code to do even the simplest of interactive task that amount to anything.
I live in the San Francisco Bay Area. We have this huge thing called Sutro tower the Official Page of the tower is the corporate site and this
Public page will give you a huge amount of information on the tower and its history.
This thing is almost 1000 feet tall and sits on the top of a Mt. Sutro and is direct line of site for most of the SF Bay Area and it packs a huge amount of RF power. The problem is that when you get behind a low lying hill the VHF TV band ( 87.5-87.9 MHz ) has shadowing problems just like FM radio which operates at 88 to 108 MHZ ( nominal ). I listen to my local PBS FM station in my car almost all the time. There are lots of places where moving the car +/- 5 feet dramatically effects reception of QKED 88.5 MHZ and it is an analog FM signal! The digital signals that are transmitted are line of sight or GTFO!
Also many many responders here seem to forget that Wi-Fi is a two way street! Just how big is your Wi-Fi unit going to be? Anything other then a home base station is forget about it. Evin with a home base station it will have to be a repeater, since you will still want your laptop / cell phone / i[whatever] / Android thingy to be able to use it and then what frequencies will you use? The entire reason that VHF is SO desirable is that it goes through walls, unlike these GHZ units that we have now where you get more then about 1 standard 2x4 framed Sheetrock wall between you and the unit and your signal drops to zilch since 100 mw only goes so far.
buy that pretty orange bridge there in San Francisco, you do have the deep right?
IPV6 has been a mess since the beginning, IS a mess and will continue to be a huge fucking mess for a long time.
They designed in the most ass-hat way possible, made it practically unusable for humans and just for fun made it require a DNS server for everyone for all intents and purposes.
I can mount up an IPV6 stack on my OpenSuSe box right now, but I can't use it for anything since my AT&T equipment does not support it and neither does AT&T's network.
The committee of ass-hats that designed this have not a damn clue about the real world and only exist in the their pristine bubble. The rest of the world has to deal with the vagaries of a thousand different ISP's and DCE manufacturers that have various levels of support for the gawd awful steaming pile that is IPV6.
You want more addresses, then mod IPV4 from a byte per address element to a word per address element and you have 65535 class A's
That can be a simple software update and it can be done incrementally without having to re-engineer the hardware.
That will give enough breathing room to build IPV7 which can be built into something that does not break the entire system.
Slashdot Mirror
Dear Anonymous COWARD
If software developers actually wrote and deployed their applications correctly a lot of whats broken in Windows would actually be fixed!
This is not to say that Windows does not have problems, it has TONS of them, but many many of them would be resolved if the idiots actually wrote applications that did not:
That is but a tiny sample of the brain dead shit that application programmers do which in turn causes all sorts of chaos in windows. YES Microsfot did build a whole shit load of supidity into Windows but the people who write software for it are even worse since they simple never do it correctly.
and realize there is no spoon.
Yeah I know, what a horrible opening, but it really applies.
Think about the utter simplicity and beauty of the equation of E=MC^2.
Read a "Brief History of Time" cover to cover about 10 times but don't try to dig into what he is saying, take it on face value, because he is explaining it, you just have let it sink in.
What will really bake your noodle is when you realize that everything has infinite energy.
I have tried them all and except for IFR (and that is not even that good, but passable, barely ) practice they do a poor job.
And yes, I am a pilot.
I have yet to use one that accurately reflects the maneuvering and performance of a real airplane, not even a Cessna 152 much less a hi performance prop plane like a Mooney or a Bonanza.
I think the basic problem is they but way to much work into "pretty" and not enough work into actual flight dynamics. I will admit that it is hard work to accurately capture that data and for how far they have come they deserve a great deal of credit but they all end being way to much like a video game. Perhaps placing a 4 axis set of accelerometers, control position and rate of control input senors, and engine sensors and recording that data while a plane does maneuvers would help. If someone could come up with the equipment I would be happy to burn a few hours in the air doing all the basic stuff and a few things close to the edge of the envelope to help them work on that particular problem.
From the TOR site...
An exit relay is the final relay that Tor traffic passes through before it reaches its destination. Exit relays advertise their presence to the entire Tor network, so they can be used by any Tor users. Because Tor traffic exits through these relays, the IP address of the exit relay is interpreted as the source of the traffic. If a malicious user employs the Tor network to do something that might be objectionable or illegal, the exit relay may take the blame. People who run exit relays should be prepared to deal with complaints, copyright takedown notices, and the possibility that their servers may attract the attention of law enforcement agencies. If you aren't prepared to deal with potential issues like this, you might want to run a middle relay instead. We recommend that an exit relay should be operated on a dedicated machine in a hosting facility that is aware that the server is running an exit node. The Tor Project blog has these excellent tips for running an exit relay. See our legal FAQ on Tor for more info.
I applaud those who do this but sadly they will be taken advantage of for illegal purposes and therefor the operators are at risk.
In other posts people suggest that ISP's should suffer the same fate but don't are reminded of the "Common Carrier" law. If these individuals were to set them selves up as a common carrier I wonder if they would realize the same protections. Given that those with CC protection do in fact cooperate with LE would that then make them obliged to do so?
If programming were easy everyone could do it. Well it is... Sorta... and everyone can sorta do it they all just can't do it correctly and well.
Yup dealing with those is a PITA but you knew the job was dangerous when you took it aye?
For years I have used the same bit of code to open and close files, streams, etc. One function to open one function to close and they have yet to fail me. The logic for opening is pretty simple, if you can't open it you report back and in certain very specific instances you have to bail out with a meaningful error message. Closing is pretty straight forward as well. If you cant release a resource ( close a file or what not ) then something is pretty drastically wrong and again time to bail out meaningful error message instead of a couple hundred lines of java stack trace which is practically meaningless to the end user.
I guess you think it stylish to use profanity, but since you are posting as AC I suppose you can get away with that.
Advancements in given programming language are great, advancements that encourage both laziness and a lack of attention to detail are worthless.
Is this what we have come to? Writing languages where programmer laziness and lack of attention to detail is heralded as the next great thing?
Someone mentioned programmers saying "High Level Languages" replacing assembler is bad? No that is not bad, it is a better means of programming when absolute metal level control is not required.
NO STATEMENT I MADE even attempted to assign any attribute to myself resembling anything like or even alluding to perfection.
Was it a true error of units that sent a billion dollar spacecraft into the surface of mars or was it someone who replied on the framework or the RTL working all that out for them? Could one ascribe that oversight as a lack of attention to detail? I think so, but that is just my opinion for whatever someone else things its worth.
It wasn't as if moving from assembler to C required less attention to detail, it simply made writing the code easier to understand 6 months later and took care of the really really love level things for you.
I have found many many bugs in my own code where I forgot to close a file before exiting and have lost data because the files contents were not flushed to disk and then properly closed and I found those bugs and fixed them before the code went out my door.
How much more will we push Moore's Law by adding yet more and more and more code to do things we as programmers should just remember to do? At what point will it take a machine with two quad core processors and 12 gigs of ram to run a simple program? Is there no limit to the lengths that we will go to take up the slack for basic laziness and lack of attention to detail so that some slack jaw can write code that will work to say nothing of having excellent performance?
Vernon D. Buerg (rip) wrote fast tiny programs that did big jobs and he did it elegantly. I shudder to think what kind of monster it would take to duplicate even LIST in Java.
M point is this. Programming takes attention to detail, it takes concentration, it takes keeping track of what you use and giving it back when you are done with it, not just skipping on to the next thing and saying "The RTL will take care of that, no need to waist my time on doing things like that.".
And yeah I have been around for a long time and I can tell by some of the low ID's replying that some of you have been around for a while as well and could see where you want to forget as many of the details as you can because of deadlines and this that or the other. Yet at the same time I see those same low ID numbers bitch and moan about bad code, programs that just blow up when you least expect it. When you bitch about that look in the mirror and tell yourself that you asked for it because you did when you advocate for things that are just automatic because really when you think about it there is not much in this world that works well 100% of the time automatically.
He might not have the umph left to go and run the company day-to-day but he will be Chairman of the Board and will be the man behind the man, guiding, advising, teaching, mentoring and unless the guy drops dead in the next few weeks Apple will continue to be the innovator that it has been with him at the helm and perhaps even if he does it will still be.
When Steve dies, there will be a marble statue of him at the front door of Apple and Woz will put it up.
Wow, you are way out of touch. My pal the insurance adjuster has an Ipad II and he rarely if ever touches a PC now except for gaming and watching porn at home. The camera takes all the pictures he needs and can record in both video and audio if required, the browser pulls up all the parts information he needs, the app on it allows him to complete the claim ON-SITE with a BT Keyboard for faster typing ( he has fat fingers ) AND submit it from the body shop or the customers house.
The iPad is the perfect tool for our times. Everything is client / server and that works great because it is a cellular data stream, with wifi backup. It is slick, it can be locked down by the issuer with their applications installed and can be updated over the wire.
No, you can't re-compile the linux kernel on it but that is not what it was designed for. It was designed to to what it does and it does that better then anything out there. I doubt Android will ever take market from it simply because Apple holds the keys to the kingdom and that makes sure that it is the same interface for one to the other, use 1 iDevice and you have used them all and that is the point. It is like windows in a way just one hell of a lot cooler and a lot more useful for the things it was designed for. It is elegant, useful, and it serves the Apple total user experience that people have become accustomed to and that can't be beat.
But not soon enough. FTFA...
Project Coin's diamond syntax for constructor calls lets the compiler infer type arguments, and the try-with-resources statement helps the compiler make reliable code by automatically closing files, sockets, and database connections when developers forget to do this, Ratcliff says: "That's something that's been tripping up developers -- especially young developers -- for years. That'll be a good productivity improvement and will reduce bugs."
I mean if that doesn't say it all I don't know what does. Hmm Allocate a resource, Free a resource. I think they still teach that in CS-101, then again maybe not. I alloc() therefor I free() ?".
You don't have to take a binary, you can take pure text that is easily parsed and controlled. eg:
objectMyMainForm : TForm
left = 100
top = 100
width = 400
height = 200
caption = 'Application One'
color = clBtnFace
font.charset = DEFAULT_CHARSET
font.color = clWindowText
font.height = -11
font.name = 'arial'
font.style = []
PixelsPerInch = 96
TextHeight = 14
object MyButton : tbutton
left = 10
top = 10
width = 40
height = 20
caption = 'Do It Now!'
onClick = MyButtonClick
end
end
So above is one of many ways you can use the very text generated by the form designer, in this case I chose Dephi but it could be any form design tool, and that is parsed and each object instantiated. Because the button control is created within the form object we know who its owner is and in automatically inherits many of the properties of the parent ( in this case the main form ) so you can be as explicit as you like or not.
Since each of these are based upon native controls the creation is pretty much instant. Since this is just text it can be compressed and encrypted and then can be examined one the "browser" side.
The only thing you have to do is create an interpreter to handle this events. The language could be JavaScript, Pascal, Python, C or pretty much any oter language you wanted to use ( Hell make up your own ) and there are lots of FOOS interpreters out there.
RAD tools like Delphi, Power Builder, etc already have data aware controls like grids, Up Down Rollers, Pick Lists etc and pre-built methods that handle 90% of what you need to do so I don't think it is a very big stretch to make this paradigm a working viable method for application delivery since there are x-plat versions of things like QT and the like that would make this method completely useable on Windows, Linux and Mac
This will fail over time but it will fail. We can only hope it fails sooner rather then later.
The idiocy of mixing a layout specification with code is going to open us up to more and more interesting types of viri and malware.
Remember CORBA? It has never seen the light of day in any serious way. It WAS a great idea.
Why have we not learned that a layout engine is most assuredly not the right tool for the job? The amount of hacks and just plain insanity you have to go through just to get thinks to work from one browser to another is starting to make lots and lots of people just go dust off their RAD tools, eg: Delphi, Power Builder, etc and just write the damn app and call it a day.
At some point the browser will have to be so huge to support the never ending flow of committee designed API's that they will make MS-Access look like a memory efficient application.
Applications are not documents and the browser needs to get back to doing document presentation and we need to build application processor that takes in application specifications and then runs them because trying to do both has been, is and will forever be a fucking mess.
While that is all well and good a few points:
The legal system is tilted directly in favor of those with deep pockets. And while you might prevail you will more then likely go broke in the process. And court costs and lawyers fees wont make up for the mental hell you and your family will go through in the process
The "free market" is taking care of those who can afford to defend themselves. So this free market you espouse takes care of those with wealth and everyone else gets fucked up the ass and has no recourse. Sounds a lot like the Mortgage backed Securities disaster.
I know you posted as AC but I also know you are reading this.
Load up either Excel or LibreCalc and then play with the scroll lock key.
As in I could do what they do with a few lines of PERL and a Beowulf Cluster!!
Indeed, ONLY your COMPLETE source code would be patentable. Anything you only have binary images for from a THIRD PARTY read that as closed source drivers, microcode binaries, obj files, RTL's etc SHALL be specifically and obviously noted in your source code with reference in comments as to the copyright holder.
Look & Feel would not be copyrightable in any way shape or form, nor would they be patentable.
Copyright would be be for 10 years, renewable one time for 5 additional years.
That means we have to define what to do about any software that has versions. Is the (c) only good for the original, or the patched version? If you have a version 1.0 of a software title, when you patch it to 1.5 is that the original version or is it a new version? If it is the original version and through the years you have gone from ( for sake of argument ) Windows XP, Windows XP 1.5, Windows XP 2.0, Windows XP 3.0 then does the original copyright of Windows XP 1.0 ( lets say 1/1/90 ) that expires 1/1/2000 with the possibility of being extended until 1/1/2005 or does each succeeding version have to be re-filed with the time frame obviously being extended from the data of publication of the latest .x version?
The Source Code has to be filed with the Office of copyright in a human readable form and the media on which it is filed must last the life of the copyright grant..
The ONLY things that should be patentable are physical devices.
ANYTHING other then that is covered by copyright.
You come up with a fancy new IC that increases radio reception by 10 fold, it is a physical device and can therefor be patented and under your control and you will sell them by the truck load or license the manufacture of the device and collect royalties. The WORLD will beat a path to your door trying to get it. Some companies will offer you huge sums for an exclusive license.
Software patents on the other hand are ludicrous on their face. You say you have a patent on Linked Lists? Well you pretty much own ALL software EVERYWHERE no matter who wrote the linked list code, no matter the language. That is wrong.
If your code is copyrighted then NO ONE ELSE can use YOUR code that YOU wrote and this is where some fools think that patents should apply since you wrote code that does compression very very well and you can reduce the OED to 10,000 bytes. Well sorry dude I can write that 10% better but using pretty much the same Linked Lists and compression algorithms, but I found a way to fold constants better then you did and my code is better, but it is not YOUR code, it is MY code and I copyrighted it IN TOTAL as a body of work that has a beginning and end end, as does yours but they are different works just like two books about the same subject are two different works that lead to the same conclusion.
Even modern operating systems are largely written in HLLs
I guess you consider C a High Level Language. I think a LOT of people would seriously disagree with you.
I don't care what OS you are using. Those are written in C and Assembler. Look HERE for yourself.
You are not going to find any php, python, java, perl, ruby etc. etc. there, not a line of it.
Mostly your comments are pointless. Most really "good" HTML is still written by hand. It may get spewed from some content management system, but who do you think wrote all the HTML and CSS for those? Do you think JOOMLA magically coughed it up?
You are seriously clue impaired.
I normally do not reply to AC but I hope you actually read this and get the hell out of the basement now and then.
Contrary to popular belief building native code apps is quite alive and well. It is faster and when built with .net ( I don't like it but have to respect it for what it is AND what it can do ) but it runs on any windows platform from XP on client AND server and has every hook built in for database work AND has data aware grid controls.
The web browser in its current incarnation is a MAJOR PITA to do serious work with requires VAST amounts of backend server code to do even the simplest of interactive task that amount to anything.
Really? Dude this is /., I mean come on.
It is all explained here.
Thanks much!
remember "Rabbit Ears" or rooftop antenna's.
I live in the San Francisco Bay Area. We have this huge thing called Sutro tower the Official Page of the tower is the corporate site and this Public page will give you a huge amount of information on the tower and its history.
This thing is almost 1000 feet tall and sits on the top of a Mt. Sutro and is direct line of site for most of the SF Bay Area and it packs a huge amount of RF power. The problem is that when you get behind a low lying hill the VHF TV band ( 87.5-87.9 MHz ) has shadowing problems just like FM radio which operates at 88 to 108 MHZ ( nominal ). I listen to my local PBS FM station in my car almost all the time. There are lots of places where moving the car +/- 5 feet dramatically effects reception of QKED 88.5 MHZ and it is an analog FM signal! The digital signals that are transmitted are line of sight or GTFO!
Also many many responders here seem to forget that Wi-Fi is a two way street! Just how big is your Wi-Fi unit going to be? Anything other then a home base station is forget about it. Evin with a home base station it will have to be a repeater, since you will still want your laptop / cell phone / i[whatever] / Android thingy to be able to use it and then what frequencies will you use? The entire reason that VHF is SO desirable is that it goes through walls, unlike these GHZ units that we have now where you get more then about 1 standard 2x4 framed Sheetrock wall between you and the unit and your signal drops to zilch since 100 mw only goes so far.
I had the same thing happen with Verizon. One day working fine, 3:00AM nothing works, nothing routes just dead.
buy that pretty orange bridge there in San Francisco, you do have the deep right?
IPV6 has been a mess since the beginning, IS a mess and will continue to be a huge fucking mess for a long time.
They designed in the most ass-hat way possible, made it practically unusable for humans and just for fun made it require a DNS server for everyone for all intents and purposes.
I can mount up an IPV6 stack on my OpenSuSe box right now, but I can't use it for anything since my AT&T equipment does not support it and neither does AT&T's network.
The committee of ass-hats that designed this have not a damn clue about the real world and only exist in the their pristine bubble. The rest of the world has to deal with the vagaries of a thousand different ISP's and DCE manufacturers that have various levels of support for the gawd awful steaming pile that is IPV6.
You want more addresses, then mod IPV4 from a byte per address element to a word per address element and you have 65535 class A's
That can be a simple software update and it can be done incrementally without having to re-engineer the hardware.
That will give enough breathing room to build IPV7 which can be built into something that does not break the entire system.