Forgot your password?

+ - LXQT Ported to QT5, New Release soon

Submitted by Tamran
Tamran (1424955) writes "From the LXDE blog page:

After the first official public release 0.7, the LXQt team is working on making it better. Our recent focus is fixing existing bugs and migrating from Qt4 to Qt5, which is required if we want to support Wayland. Now we had something to show. The latest source code in our git repository can be compiled with Qt5. by just passing -DUSE_QT5=ON flag to cmake. Building with Qt4 is still supported until the next release, but later we’ll focus on Qt5. Recently we also got some patches from the community and also a new developer joined us. We’re now fixing some remaining bugs. Hopefully we can have 0.8 release soon. :-)

Already the team is fast at work with new PCManFM and LibFM libraries."

Comment: Re:Um, right. (Score 5, Insightful) 278

by Tamran (#46552211) Attached to: Don't Help Your Kids With Their Homework

You mean like correcting the blatant errors in the grade school science texts?

This is exactly on point! Sure, having discussions and making students think deeper may affect their quiz/exam scores. However, there are countless examples of how these exams are no more than simulations of real life and how being able to respond to new situations creatively is the true measure of intelligence (sorry, I'm too lazy to bring any references but surely a Google search will reveal countless cases).

I now teach university undergraduate engineering classes after working in the industry for many years. What I now realize is that the people typically in this role have never worked as an Engineer and have NO CONTEXT to what they're actually teaching. With no context, how can these people be fair at assessment? In reality, either the product ships or it doesn't. But exams often become about solving some tricky problem that is from an 1800's analytical paper. Not to say these case studies aren't relevant, but the point is the objectives of education SHOULD BE some skill set as opposed to scoring high on some exam.

All that said, I believe the criteria used to make the conclusions in the summary are way off base and also lack context. Parents, don't stop debating with your children about what they're learning. People should balance questioning everything they are told with heuristics and best practices in order to "get things done." Test scores be damned if we can't even assemble lawn furniture at the end of the day.

Comment: Re:Blocking customers from the cash register ... (Score 1) 169

by Tamran (#45850999) Attached to: ABC Kills Next-Day Streaming For Non-Subscribers

I'm behind on my tv, so waiting another week for something is no big deal at all.

I think the issue is that the networks don't seem to want you to wait a week unless you pay them. My point above is really that they should focus on getting the eyes on the product rather than billing each and ever viewer that doesn't watch when they decide you should.

Google figured this out ... we're all customers, but none of us pay them directly. That's how they can make money. If Google charged me a subscription to do web searches, they'd have died a decade ago.

Comment: Re:They probably don't want to burn affiliates (Score 1) 169

by Tamran (#45850837) Attached to: ABC Kills Next-Day Streaming For Non-Subscribers

Often the "client" and "customer" are different groups. Advertisers pay based on number of viewers which is why ratings are so heavily measured and talked about. Rarely does the customer pay the networks directly except in certain cases like HBO and Showtime.

I do believe the subscription model will rule someday, I'd say this is equivalent to radio play for CD sales. It's hard to directly link them but it's clear there is a correlation.

ABC is making a bad decision here because they don't have the "juice" needed to demand a subscription (yet?). I think people will just find something else to watch, record it, or find a torrent.

Comment: Blocking customers from the cash register ... (Score 3, Insightful) 169

by Tamran (#45850763) Attached to: ABC Kills Next-Day Streaming For Non-Subscribers

... will ensure they don't buy anything. Similarly, making it hard for people to watch will ensure they don't. If they do want to watch, more will look for torrents (amongst other things) than go back to the stone age days (before PVR's, etc). People nowadays will not bother being inconvenienced unless you have awesome stuff - although it's not my cup of tea, Apple is an example of where people will stand in line for hours and be inconvenienced.

I wouldn't say ABC shows are worth putting off tennis practice (or whatever hobby you have) for. This will not end well.

Comment: In retrospect ... (Score 2, Funny) 100

by Tamran (#44413947) Attached to: Why Bob Mansfield Was Cut From Apple's Executive Team

... perhaps the lawsuit wasn't such a great idea? I believe it's likely the case that Apple needs Samsung. Also, the billion dollar lawsuit is like a tube of toothpaste in this scenario. Meaning that you squish one end only expands the other end (i.e. squishing does not change the volume if the cap is on).

Comment: Re:The real reason (Score 1) 933

by Tamran (#41165955) Attached to: How Apple Killed the Linux Desktop

OSX killed Linux on the desktop indirectly only because the most popular (to the layman) distro is Ubuntu and Ubuntu thought it would be cute to revamp their desktop into a wannabe OSX desktop, pissing many like me off in the process. A Relix is not a Rolex. A Coby is not a Sony. Ubuntu was doing just fine in making a name for itself, now it's a watered-down sissy distro which threw itself at Steve Jobs' feet rather than continue manning the fuck up.

I think Ubuntu's changes had something to do with a drop. I know this from my many IT friends who went back to Windows because they "didn't want a phone interface on their PC". That said, Windows 8 in itself may drive them back. I advocate the position that Gnome 3 (and the way it was handled by the developers) directly and indirectly (causing Ubuntu to go with Unity) caused a large fracture in the Linux community which chased many away.

What really is killing Linux (or why it's never really taken off) is the fragmentation issues. Sure, choice is a good thing but in the present implementation of these available choices full QC (the boring stuff) is rarely done. This leaves a system lacking "spit-n-polish". A good example of this fragmentation is KDE vs. Gnome(2) libraries. Although different under the hood, are they really all that different to the average user?

Where Apple comes in is that "spit-n-polish" that is missing. If you create a quality vacuum, it will get filled. It's as simple as that.

+ - Pixar's OpenSubdiv Tech demo->

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes "Last week at SIGGRAPH, Pixar Animation Studios announced OpenSubdiv, an open source implementation of the Renderman subdivision surface technology, thus releasing the patents to the long standing Pixar "secret sauce". In addition to the offline subdivision scheme, it also includes a GPU implementation. This video demonstrates a realtime deforming subdivision surface running at 50 FPS in Maya (though it is freely available to use anywhere). The source code is available on Pixar's GitHub account."
Link to Original Source

+ - Apple offered expensive licensing option to Samsung in 2010->

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes "The treasure trove of documents from the ongoing Apple-Samsung dispute continue to flow on. The latest startling revelation touches on Apple and Samsung’s licensing discussions pre-litigation.

In October 2010, 6 months before Apple said “enough is enough” and initiated its lawsuit against Samsung, Apple offered Samsung a licensing deal for its patented technologies. As part of its offer, Apple said it was willing to offer Samsung a royalty rate of $30 per Android smartphone and $40 per Android tablet. Apple also indicated that it would wipe 20% off of its royalty asking price if Samsung was willing to cross license its own patents with Apple.

As part of its presentation, Apple explained: "Samsung chose to embrace and imitate Apple’s iPhone archetype. Apple would have preferred that Samsung request a license to do this in advance. Because Samsung is a strategic supplier to Apple, we are prepared to offer a royalty-bearing license for this category of device.""

Link to Original Source

There is never time to do it right, but always time to do it over.