What are the odds they are building off of Mir or Wayland to get their improved graphics and input performance? If they choose one of these it would add a lot of weight to the respective choice.
While this post is a valuable addition to Drew's analysis, I feel it's not really a rebutal at all.
The fuck! A car analogy that is actually accurate! Congrats, AC
What's even more telling is how misplaced their "we're on top" attitude is. Xbox 360 may have had the lead for quite a while due to being released earlier, but the PlayStation 3 actually did surpass it in worldwide shipments. In total shipments, MS is actually behind both Nintendo and Sony.
Then again, I think they still do have an edge in the US (I'm in Europe, so I don't know the US numbers by head), and given that MS is a US company they must feel like they own the world.
It seems to me you're making an issue out of nothing. You say "applications must talk to the Window system, so the Window system is as important as the kernel", but in practice this is not true. Applications talk to a toolkit/library like Qt or GTK, or (as what this article is about, and which you agree is a good idea) SDL. These libraries do the hard work because noone wants to talk to Xlib directly since it's a mess. Now, as long as these libraries all support X, Wayland, Mir or whatever will be around next week there simply won't be a problem.
You said it yourself. "It is always a good idea to use a platform independant library", and I agree. Yet you continue with the rest of your rant as if nobody actually does that.
PS.: I disagree Wayland should be in the LSB. As others already mentioned, let it first prove its worth. And not to forget X's network transparency is very valuable to some. Forcing Wayland into the LSB would be like throwing out the baby with the bath water, at the very least.
Not just that, the API they use for developing native applications is EFL. You know, the API from Enlightenment, the immensely popular X11 window manager. It's all pure C. That will be an ecosystem developers will flock to en masse!
"Facebook didn't immediately respond to an emailed request for comment, according to The Huffington Post."
While I agree with the article's premise, this just seems incredibly lazy to me. Heck, e-mail isn't even meant for immediate responses!
It's getting a stupid meme, but again: this.
I got a job as a web developer (though the job title is actually Senior Software Engineer). I did a Bachelor's in Computer Science and a Master's in Software Engineering, and it sure paid off. Of course going to college didn't teach me how to do PHP or HTML or CSS, but it did teach me about time complexity, algorithms, data structures, and all the stuff needed to solve scalability problems. It taught me database design, which you better firmly grasp before even thinking about using a NoSQL solution. It taught me about testability, software processes and design patterns, all stuff which any developer should know, web or not.
I remember when I was young and just about to start going to college. I was a self-taught programmer, was working as a programmer part-time already, and I still had the arrogance to even doubt if college could still teach me anything useful. Boy, am I glad I finished my studies anyway.
Funny, Gabe himself considers Apple a bigger threat to the upcoming Steambox than either Microsoft or Sony.
But even so you may be half right, Valve will probably be a threat to Sony and MS as well.
I chose a laser printer (someone else's) where "someone else's" means "the printer from work". My personal printing needs are so few I find it hard to justify getting my own printer and letting cartridges dry out and associated annoyances.
What I think mlts means to say is he wants a browser that is implemented for Metro itself, not just presents itself there. Neither IE10 nor Chrome runs in the restricted sandbox like Metro apps.
It's not bullshit at all. But yes, the Data Protection Directive makes it very hard for companies to comply with both PATRIOT and the DPD. In other words, many US companies are excluded by default from providing cloud services to many European agencies.
Well, it seems to me the major forces driving the development of a compiler are the chip manufacturers and the developers of operating system. Both have an intrinsic desire to have a good compiler available to them. But what vested interest do they have that this compiler be GCC? If at some point in the future LLVM were to be become the one generating the most efficient code, and if the LLVM codebase is the more maintainable one, then why not switch?
And both chip manufacturers and OS developers seem to have a common goal of making their optimizations available to as many developers as possible. It does not seem to be in their interest to make their optimized versions prioprietary. After all, the compiler is not their money maker, it's simply a prerequisite of getting developers to support their OS or CPU in the first place!
You're right any GPL purists will likely stick to GCC, but personally I doubt they make up the majority of the GCC community.
My agenda has no stake in this debate other than me wanting to have a good open-source C++ compiler available.
Why your mumbling about browsers is beyond me, but maybe I'm the one missing something...
If both were proprietary software, I'd agree, but given they're open-source, I don't think so.
GCC is an open-source project. How are they going to hire extra developers to keep the edge over LLVM? And to what end? Once LLVM takes over the crown I believe it makes more sense for a lot of GCC developers to just continue their work on LLVM instead, and GCC will shrink to irrelevance. But it's still good for all involved, as everybody gets a better compiler
(And yes, I know, this might not happen for a long time, and GCC supports many more languages than LLVM, but I do think over time LLVM will become more dominant...)