Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Application installers suck. (Score 1) 324

by Gr8Apes (#48896985) Attached to: How To Hijack Your Own Windows System With Bundled Downloads
I'm well aware of what an app bundle, or really any kind of packaging in OSX is. I was only addressing the aspects of Windows and the registry and the perceived lack of transportability of windows programs. None of those things need occur in windows, it's just shitty developers toeing the MS line or worse, not knowing any better.

Comment: Re:Good news (Score 2) 410

by Gr8Apes (#48886989) Attached to: Disney Turned Down George Lucas's Star Wars Scripts
The first Transformers movie sucked badly. Really badly. The first Star Wars movie was considered pretty awesome then, and has weathered the years pretty well (think about how many other special effects laden movies are treated well 45 years later). The second Star Wars movie was awesome, and is still considered good. I don't know about others, but the third movie was a major let down, bordering on the ridiculous, and seemed targeted at an age range half of the previous two movies. The prequels were... unmentionable, other than to hold them up to display how additional experience, wisdom, and financial capacity have exactly 0 bearing on the quality of a movie.

Comment: Re:Application installers suck. (Score 4, Interesting) 324

by Gr8Apes (#48806789) Attached to: How To Hijack Your Own Windows System With Bundled Downloads

Because, thanks to nonsense like the registry, installing an app into Windows is a non-trivial operation. ... So if you've got files that need to tag along with the .exe (especially DLLs) or want the app installed for more than one user, you're stuck with installer hell.

a) it's crappy developers that force the registry hell on you. There's no reason to use it, nor any requirement to use it.
b) There's no problem building a single EXE with all required DLLs (or there didn't used to be.)
c) there's nothing preventing you from shipping a zip (because windows still doesn't understand a tarball) which has everything packaged up nice and neat (ie, a bundle)
d) multiple users can use an app that you drop into the appropriate places, some will require that when you drop it there, you have to elevate your privs, but that's pretty standard
There's no excuse to have installer hell. Just say no.

Comment: Re:Makes sense. (Score 0) 629

by Gr8Apes (#48794031) Attached to: Google Throws Microsoft Under Bus, Then Won't Patch Android Flaw
I wasn't commenting about you specifically, just using your post as a segue. Sorry if my post implied anything other than that. For what it's worth, I did and do play around with Android across the 2.3 through 4.4 versions, and I can't say I prefer any of them over the Apple ecosystem. If your desire is to tinker with them, absolutely, but if you just want a phone that mostly works and doesn't require learning 5 different ways to get through various menu navigations, then no. Especially if you're dealing with non-technical older people.

Comment: Re:Makes sense. (Score 0) 629

by Gr8Apes (#48793883) Attached to: Google Throws Microsoft Under Bus, Then Won't Patch Android Flaw
Aw gee, and after all the talk about how Apple was a horrible company for "abandoning" the iPhone 4 users in September 2013 (phone released in 2010). Oh, "abandoning" means that the iPhone 4 merely doesn't upgrade to the latest iOS full version release, it's still supported AFAIK under iOS 7. Queue the Android shills in 3, 2, ...

Comment: Re:Apple IS a software company (Score 1) 332

by Gr8Apes (#48710265) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What Tech Companies Won't Be Around In 10 Years?
actually, the hardware is better. Decidedly better. Samsung would kill to be able to have the same touchscreen. Have you actually used a Galaxy S4? I have. They suck hardware wise in comparison. Just because you make a paper mache tiger doesn't make it like a real tiger except from a viewable distance.

Comment: Re:Apple IS a software company (Score 1) 332

by Gr8Apes (#48698547) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What Tech Companies Won't Be Around In 10 Years?

Umm, Apple IS a software company. They don't give their software away, the just sell it attached to a piece of hardware.

Apple is a platform company, and always has been. The user experience is driven by software running on applicable hardware. Apple started as a hardware company, and has always focused on having a reliable platform. A Jobs snippet taken out of context doesn't mean much.

Their hardware is nothing particularly special. A Mac is barely different from a Dell hardware-wise and if you put Windows on the Mac you can't tell the difference.

On this, just about everyone will disagree. Their hardware is different, performs within published specs, and lasts better and longer than any competitor. Putting windows on a MacBook Pro gives you the ultimate windows laptop, lighter, faster, and longer battery life as well as longer lasting hardware. Putting OS X on non Apple hardware can result in a relatively fast solid system at a lower cost than comparable Apple hardware, but rarely better functioning, at least until the latest soldered on memory garbage on minis at least.

They sell a vertically integrated platform which includes both software and hardware. Apple does not just sell hardware.

And you knew this, so why do you state they're a software company?

Utility is when you have one telephone, luxury is when you have two, opulence is when you have three -- and paradise is when you have none. -- Doug Larson

Working...