Errm, I probably would say Java IS the Swiss army knife of programming languages. Jack of all trades, but master of none. Java might not give you the best result, but it will probably give you less aggravation getting there than most anything else, simply because it is easy to get working and running everywhere, there are a ton of libraries existing, and the compile and link model is simply easier to work with.

You've probably got more chance in OS-X than most anything else. What do you advocate, CICS mainframe?

You _can_ write very efficient code, and you _can_ write very concise code, but the mental effort required to make all that happen means that few people think it is worth the effort.

Err, well you've got to write the core code in _something_, and why not Objective-C? You can compile it for any platform you like, and I'm a big proponent of sticking to one programming language for everything. You lose a lot by shifting between paradigms and being unable to pass objects around between different layers. Most likely Apple's iTunes for Windows is written in Objective-C and it works for them. Objective-C is a pretty thin layer around C, and at least in the old days, just preprocessed it into C, so it isn't inherently less portable than C.

As someone who did some programming in Sather, which explicitly split up interface and implementation inheritance, I don't know how you justify the claim that implementation inheritance is "a broken concept".

That's a little bit prejudiced. There's absolutely nothing wrong with using Objective-C for general purpose programming. Whether it has enough to offer to make it one's first choice is another thing, but its perfectly serviceable, and in so far as being object oriented, is a decent platform for object development.

Errm, what does Objective-C have OTHER than an object system? That's all there is in the Objective part of Objective-C.

I find it very odd the claim that OO is not the natural way of using C++. I mean, what is the natural way then?

Microsoft needs to grow a pair and lay down the law to any company that wants to be an OEM for their products. Apple wouldn't let the carriers pull this stunt on their phones.

So they're breeding mice with the genes of a human brain? As Kramer said in that episode, there is a secret plan for pig men, or rather rat men.

That was my first thought too on reading this story. They've made it hard to see the program instructions, so just go back a step and reverse engineer the decrypting algorithm.

Like many coders, I too have written code to upload files, but I'm damned if I know what files were uploaded or what their copyright status is.

Je Suis Kim Dotcom.

More like going after Al Capone's tea lady for putting a nip of whisky in her night cap.

Pretty much everyone knows dealing drugs is illegal. But when you've got drop box, youtube, and everyone else allowing everyone to upload stuff to their sites, how are you supposed to know it is criminal? Even more so when all you are doing is writing code, not making value judgments on what is going to be uploaded with it.

Yes, technically. But if you're told "make a web site so people can upload stuff", and then for some esoteric reason, the feds decide that the uploading is criminal copyright conspiracy, that's hardly fair is it?