"Google certainly doesn't fit the bill—after its original search engine and ad platform, it hasn't invented anything earth shattering."
Playing down the accomplishments of large, established companies doesn't mean they're not innovative, but it does seem to indicate bias by the author.
goruka (1721094) writes "Often, when programming large applications in C++, the executable tends to get huge (several megabytes). I know that some factors (C++ features) such as inline abuse, templates, constructors, strings, etc. contribute to adding fat to the binary executable. Although this isn't a big problem in desktop PCs, which have gigabytes of RAM nowadays, it is very serious when writing for mobile or embedded devices. So my question is, are there any tools or profiling techniques to somehow "detect" which sections of a binary (functions, constants, , etc) are consuming the most space? I know that there are many memory, cpu, I/O profilers around, but executable binary size profiling seems not to be a common area of optimization..."
Soulskill from the bringing-civilization-to-the-savages dept.
rsk writes "Internet Explorer 6, 7 and to some extent 8 have been the bane of every CSS-loving web developer for years. With the spreading adoption of CSS3's fancier rendering effects, like rounded edges, drop shadows and linear gradients, the frustration of needing to deal with IE compatibility is growing. 327 Creative's Jason Johnston has created the CSS3 Pie library to address this. CSS3 Pie adds support for CSS3's most popular rendering techniques to Internet Explorer 6, 7 and 8 by way of the IE-only CSS property 'behavior.' CSS3 Pie is open sourced under the Apache 2 license and can be accessed from its github repository."
CmdrTaco from the well-isn't-that-special dept.
ciaran_o_riordan writes "The US Supreme Court has finally decided the Bilski case (PDF). We've known that Bilski's patent would get thrown out; that was clear from the open mockery from the judges during last November's hearing. The big question is, since rejecting a particular patent requires providing a general test and explaining why this patent fails that test, how broad will their test be? Will it try to kill the plague of software patents? And is their test designed well enough to stand up to the army of patent lawyers who'll be making a science (and a career) of minimizing and circumventing it? The judges have created a new test, so this will take some reading before any degree of victory can be declared. The important part is pages 5-16 of the PDF, which is the majority opinion. The End Software Patents campaign is already analyzing the decision, and collecting other analyses. Some background is available at Late-comers guide: What is Bilski anyway?"More analysis of the decision is available at Patently-O.
Exactly. Heck, by their own admission it's speculation. From TFA: "It's unclear how many, if any, of the vulnerabilities patched this week affect Apple's iPad." Which is definitely a far cry from the horrors the article's title implies.
kdawson from the don't-frag-me-bro dept.
tbray writes "Here are the details on the Android Compatibility Program — which combines the source, a formal compatibility spec, an open-source test suite, and access to the Android Market as reward for good behavior (program page). People like to rant about the subject of fragmentation, so here's TFM that they should be R'ing first."