Speaking of style over function, I take it the new phone is not using LiquidMetal for it's metal. They teased a liquid metal ad last week. But it looks like just polished metal to me. Or is it? Apple's exclusive rights purchase for liquid Metal technology I beleive ran out a week ago, making it possible this could be a liquid metal phone case.
BTW, what happened to E17? I remember Enlightenment being the darling-child of WMs in the Linux community. Is it nowadays to difficult to configure and/or install?
There is an OS called Tizen, Enlightenment Foundation Libraries are the core of it. Enlightenment still exists is getting better but its been moving away from just a cool window manager to a full on GUI for its OS.
I think this comment is silly but LXDE merged with Razor-Qt and is now creating the lightweight desktop based on Qt. This is pretty good coverage:
Heavy Qt = KDE
Heavy GTK+ = Gnome
Light Qt = LXDE
Light GTK+ = XFCE
I'm not sure I'd accuse Apple of "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish". That's not really their model at all. For one thing they are disinterested in monopoly.
Well said, excellent comment. Just a correction. CR LF (Windows), LF (Unix) and CR (Macintosh) so there are still 3. Also 0x00 is still used for lots of mainframe data for end of line though that gets a bit more tricky since the underlying concept of file doesn't map as well.
As CRLF was most common on teletypes.
Microsoft did a lot of great engineering under Gates and Ballmer as well. In terms of softening their competitive streak that happens to many companies as they move up market. IBM for example is far less proprietary now than they used to be.
I don't know that's true. Gecko is open source as well. I'd say Webkit is likely dominant because Google picked it as an alternative to Firefox and Google's programmers plus Apple's programmers worked cooperatively for years. That pairing could have happened on a closed source project under a licensing agreement as per many other projects jointly developed.
The other thing I think that helped Webkit is that Webkit was designed from the ground up to be useful for other applications to build small custom browsers like one sees in many mobile apps.
Yes I can. That's the sort of stuff they did say 20 years ago. They were advocates of both standards and individual experimentation. So for example they liked Flash being cross platform but wanted Active-X for when developers wanted platform specific features.
10 years ago their goal was to retard progress on the web.
I'm not sure it is such a long time at all. How much does the complexity of computer systems increase every 5 years? How far is something Google's engine from being an autonomous, self improving analysis system far smarter than a human? As for self replicating code is what is self replicating not the AI. The same way that cultures break themselves into individual brains and replicate partial copies of the culture into new brains.
Your years are way off. Windows 3.1 laptops all had hard drives. The portables with just dual floppy are mid 80s.
And to warp up, what makes money from the fossil fuel industry so dirty when its tied to papers that disagree with AGW but clean as white snow when its given to the AGW camp side? Because I'm sure you know that there is just as much, if not more money given by big energy to the AGW camp, from Shell, to Exxon, Koch and others.
I know - I mentioned this specifically earlier in the comments.
I have been funded by exactly that sort of money, in fact, in past research, although I am currently funded via a large general programme grant.
You're inferring that I think "oil money" is dirty. All I'm saying is that not disclosing your funding source *regardless of what your science says* is suspect.
Yes the group that voted the 2nd time. That's who we have statistics on.
He worked, as did his co-authors, on this paper on his own time.
As was disclosed.
Given the nature of the material in it, that is a very convenient dodge, and is certainly an unusual way to go about it.
There's obviously nothing wrong with that (assuming that your other funding sources can pay your bills), but it's not typical. Whether it is suspicious or not, it looks suspicious.
Is that why there are so many medical studies showing that smoking pot does not have short-term harmful effects? Standard? Sure. Ethical? My ass.
There are lots of papers that say that, just as there are many that say the opposite. It's not at all settled.
They all should disclose who is funding them though, as is typical.
"Just think, with VLSI we can have 100 ENIACS on a chip!" -- Alan Perlis
