Wait, is google just making fun of the patent system, showing how it is flawed?
More likely they're just adding something innovative like forum moderators to google groups+ or something or the sort, though...
By that reasoning, everything you do in the analog world that will be replicated in the digital world is patentable as "innovation".
E.g., under that reasoning, I would patent a method to input text letter by letter, by pressing specific areas in a touchscreen, which may or may not have the letters drown on the touchscreen.
Then you'd say, a "keyboard is not a touch screen".
Spot on.
With ICS (and probably others) allowing doing more things in that clock screen, like getting access to notifications, and direct access to the camera, this argument gains even more weight.
yes, that is what I said, they won't be doing anything that someone else hasn't done before them. But I think the people that like gaming on ipads, aren't the type to buy a home console. They are the lowest of the low gamers. They are basicly the people who play solitare on windows. You don't need horsepower for the games they play.
I disagree, and predicting ahead, I think you're just plain wrong. For example, I quite enjoy playing 3d racing games on my galaxy tab 10.1. Time will tell.
> Gate One is dual-licensed: AGPLv3 or Proprietary.
> static/bell.ogg - Taken from KDE's default sound theme (KDE-Sys-App-Message.ogg)
> which is licensed under the GPLv2:
gplv2 and gplv3 are incompatible. If it's the "gplv2 or later" version, then mention so.
The combining work will be under agplv3.
I assume you're not including that gpl'ed sound file in the proprietary license version. I suggest you clarify that.
No, they're just going to push forward on:
http://osxdaily.com/2011/06/19/ipad-2-ios-5-airplay-video-mirroring-become-a-tv-gaming-console/
Tablet (with good processing power) + Airplay (or some other video/audio transport good enough for HD with acceptable latency over a local wifi network).
Which is, connecting the dots you already have, and realizing the console in the living room can become irrelevant or not necessary.
It looks to me that the experience isn't far off from Nintendo's new Wii U controller. But, with the big difference that you'll see thousands of tittles cheap or free on the app market.
Is is. Even from the article itself...:
"That’s impressive, but it’s also old news. Visual Planet has been installing these films for years. If you’ve read Singularity Hub regularly (which causes much less brain cancer than you would think) you may remember our earlier coverage of Displax. The Portuguese company did many of the same demonstrations. That makes sense as they were one of Visual Planet’s partners. There are true competitors, however. 3M has had a similar technology for years, and as you get into smaller sizes the number of available solutions skyrockets."
URL or it didn't happen. Please.
The current vulgar definition of "hacker" is not what the original term meant back in the days. And it's also not Eric S. Raymond's definition either.
Most people miss the point that they're not comparing the church with the "hackers" that do DoS attachs on some major servers to prove a point, or those that crack into major databases to expose private intel.
See Eric's definition here: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html
"What Is a Hacker?
The Jargon File contains a bunch of definitions of the term "hacker", most having to do with technical adeptness and a delight in solving problems and overcoming limits. If you want to know how to become a hacker, though, only two are really relevant.
There is a community, a shared culture, of expert programmers and networking wizards that traces its history back through decades to the first time-sharing minicomputers and the earliest ARPAnet experiments. The members of this culture originated the term "hacker". Hackers built the Internet. Hackers made the Unix operating system what it is today. Hackers run Usenet. Hackers make the World Wide Web work. If you are part of this culture, if you have contributed to it and other people in it know who you are and call you a hacker, you're a hacker.
The hacker mind-set is not confined to this software-hacker culture. There are people who apply the hacker attitude to other things, like electronics or music actually, you can find it at the highest levels of any science or art. Software hackers recognize these kindred spirits elsewhere and may call them "hackers" too and some claim that the hacker nature is really independent of the particular medium the hacker works in. But in the rest of this document we will focus on the skills and attitudes of software hackers, and the traditions of the shared culture that originated the term "hacker".
There is another group of people who loudly call themselves hackers, but aren't. These are people (mainly adolescent males) who get a kick out of breaking into computers and phreaking the phone system. Real hackers call these people "crackers" and want nothing to do with them. Real hackers mostly think crackers are lazy, irresponsible, and not very bright, and object that being able to break security doesn't make you a hacker any more than being able to hotwire cars makes you an automotive engineer. Unfortunately, many journalists and writers have been fooled into using the word "hacker" to describe crackers; this irritates real hackers no end.
The basic difference is this: hackers build things, crackers break them.
If you want to be a hacker, keep reading. If you want to be a cracker, go read the alt.2600 newsgroup and get ready to do five to ten in the slammer after finding out you aren't as smart as you think you are. And that's all I'm going to say about crackers.
"
"A tide of cheap, mediocre Chinese tablets would kill the platform before it catches on."
Nonsense. On contrary, it would thrive the platform.
If that happens, then _everybody_ can afford _a_ tablet, and the market gets way larger, and the platform becomes ubiquitous and the best platform for developers to spend resources on. Those who want better and more featureful devices would still get them from HTC/Motorola/Apple whatnot or whatever company wants to built tablets with top-of-the-art hardware.
"if Google were to release the source for Honeycomb, Google would be unable to prevent it from being installed on mobile phones and 'creating a really bad user experience.'"
So what? If it creates a really bad user experience, then users won't use it. Let users decide. Survival of the fittest.
Allowing it would allow experimentation. This does nothing but prevent innovation. Sad.
Someone tell these guys about the "Uncanny valley" theory.
I viewed it, I hereby turn myself in. Here's my IP: 127.0.0.1
I've got the patent covering the process of posting on Slashdot.
The optimum committee has no members. -- Norman Augustine
