Comment Re:Why would I work for free to make Apple rich? (Score 1) 268
Maybe the fat cat just has a glandular problem?
People are abandoning GNU's forced openness and going to licenses that basically let big companies exploit the software any way they want to.
Because it's about altruism and about writing code, not about furthering your ideological agenda.
If you want to be an activist in the software world and tie your ideology to your code then you already have the tools to do so, but you do have to make better software than everybody else and make software that regular people actually want to use.
There are some exceptional examples of great Free Software that further the GNU ideology but these are almost exclusively developer/admin tools, not products that end users have anything to do with. Free Software is great for developers to work together but it has never really succeeded in winning over end users. There's no reason the first real captivating smartphone or tablet or smartwatch couldn't have been produced by the Open Source and Free Software community but the barrier is that it is a developer-centric innovator while being a user-centric fast-follower. Great innovation for developer tools but a me-too for end user products.
And that's why i believe the BSD licenses are the most open of all open-source licenses.
Of course it is, GPL is all about freedom for the user over freedom for the developer, about being restrictive so that the source code is re-distributed which is its fundamental flaw: users don't care about source code, that's what developers care about! BSD is about giving freedom to developers who have the option about how much freedom to extend to the user and that user has the choice of whether to accept that developer's product or to choose something else.
Which matters - let me know how trying to run Apple on non-apple hardware without paying for a license goes, in comparison to a GPL'd OS.
FFS when are you idiots going to get it?! Free Software is about Freedom, it's not about it being gratis! Whether or not you pay for something is irrelevant in terms of Free Software.
IOW the GPL is the superior license over the BSD type licenses.
No, there is no requirement in the GPL that would force Apple to pay for it if they used it. You seem to be confused about what the requirements of the GPL license are, it is about code contribution, not about monetary contribution.
What I meant was that MS didn't do it for the same reason a Google does it.
Yeah because you really know exactly why these companies do it. Microsoft has been donating to the Apache foundation for over 1/2 a decade now and still continue to do it and that hasn't affected the foundation's direction in any profound way. So while I'm sure the MS conspiracy theorists love to postulate about how MS will try to control ASF, in over 5 years there is still nothing that gives any basis to whatever it is you are claiming. I doubt lack of proof would stop you spreading your FUD though.
Well, you admit that this - "the only difference is that they specified the post operation action" - is not in the prior art video.
That's not innovative! That is clearly obvious! Having an onscreen toggle do something is not innovative, what would even be the point of having such a thing if it didn't do anything?! And using that toggle to "unlock a phone" is an idea, not an implementation of an idea and you cannot patent an idea. The patent system is designed to share ideas while protecting innovative individual implementations of that idea.
There's also the feature about continuous movement of an image corresponding to a finger position. That's not in the video.
There's clearly 3 frames of movement there that follow the touch, whether that is the refresh rate of the screen or just how many animation frames they have doesn't really matter, sure the iPhone has a higher refresh rate and more frames but that doesn't make it different.
Uh... I think you may be confused.
No, you are confused. Apple got a patent on this and the only difference is that they specified the post operation action and do it "on a handheld device".
So what exactly is screwed up there, and who is calling that "innovation"?
The USPTO is calling it innovation, this exact thing has already been implemented as per the video with the difference that it is "on a handheld device".
Try it this way: what part of this is not covered in prior art and is thus innovative?
Best listen to your CUSTOMERS when they all tell you it's stupid and crap.
Thing is that during the development phase of Windows 8 that is exactly what they claimed to do, based on customer feedback data (through the customer improvement program) they determined that people didn't use the start menu and instead pinned applications to the taskbar or used the desktop (much like people do in OSX which has no start menu). Now I'm sure many people didnt participate in that program probably for privacy fears, though I'm sure the same people are also confident that MS has built backdoors into Windows anyway so I dont see the issue.
The really amazing thing I see with this is the amount of very passionate Windows users on
people are complaining about the fact that it's a tablet interface that's been shoehorned into a desktop, and everything about it is designed to push you back to the tablet interface (which, conveniently for Microsoft, is a walled garden that they control).
What exactly is it you do with your computer? Everything I do with mine on a daily basis works the same in Windows 7 as it does in Windows 8. Now configuring some PC settings is a little different, and search is now dedicated (win+s) rather than in the start menu (which is of course gone). Now if I were futzing around in the OS and not actually doing anything or if I had developed an inexplicable dependence on Metro apps then maybe I could understand it but none of my applications - and hence tasks that I use my computer for - operate any differently. I don't particularly like the new interface on my desktop (though it's good on touch devices) so I just use the boot-to-desktop switch and things work just as they always have.
The ribbon shot that in the foot at the expense of precious screen space.
Oh come on, with dirt cheap high resolution monitors you should have gotten to a point where screen realestate is hardly an issue for doing office work.
Seriously, a very important feature of Microsoft products was the ability to customize them to a particular job or work environment.
You can customize the ribbon. You can create ribbons and within those you can create groups and put buttons in those groups, which is certainly more intuitive than toolbars and menus however if you already are indoctrinated in the use of toolbars and menus then changing is obviously of dubious value. Personally I'm not an office worker (as in I don't spend time producing and editing office documents).
It's time to turn off the computer and find a nice place with neighbors at least a mile away.
You're only just now realizing that any communication can be intercepted?
In my experience Linux is far more unreliable than Windows these days. Sure, show-stopping kernel panics are rare, but little glitches here and there are very common.
It all depends on your distro and what drivers and other software you have installed. From a reliability and stability perspective the stock Windows 8.1 install and an up-to-date RHEL are both really as stable as eachother, but in both cases graphics drivers are often a quick way to compromise stability. Using "Linux" in this context is always a misnomer because nobody just runs Linux and certainly there is wide variance in the stability of Linux distros.
we make the patent office show that every element of a patent claim existed in the prior art before we throw it out as not new or obvious.
Which is why the patent system if obviously completely screwed up, all you need to do is take an existing idea and add "on a handheld device" and they call that innovation and you can patent it. You really think that's a good system? Obviously a bunch of European countries don't as many have invalidated some of these patents.
Like BestBuy cares when you walk out with 20 boxes of MS Office Home and Student.
Seriously you're an idiot, you cannot buy iOS, Windows Store or Android apps from BestBuy and if you have an enterprise account to deploy to iPads that you manage then yes it's going to be pretty clear if you're buying dozens of Home and Student versions.
So it is the same?
No, the licensing is the same, clearly the product is not the same.
Oh, so then its NOT the same
Clearly not, your failed inference above shows that and for some reason you still asked the question, why is that?
If you need desktop versions of word and excel, then yes, having an ipad for your email sitting next to it won't cut it.
You don't necessarily need Outlook either. This weird obsession you have with evangelising Microsoft products where somehow just because you need desktop versions of Word and Excel means you need Outlook really does have the mark of a paid shill. Not to mention your wilful ignorance around the suggestion that businesses would buy iPad apps from BestBuy.
Biology is the only science in which multiplication means the same thing as division.
