Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:No (Score 2, Interesting) 162

by thorsen (#31144802) Attached to: Nokia, Intel Merge Maemo, Moblin Into MeeGo

Please mod that guy up or the parent down. Package management is a completely irrelevant problem.

These are actually important questions:

How long will it take them to cut GTK support?

What does this mean for Nokias Qt support? Many people in the Qt community have been worried that they would cut back on the desktop support in favour of the mobile parts.

Intel controlling a Linux distro? How does this fit into the larger picture? How does this affect the possibility of it getting into the phones from, say, Motorola?

Package management is irrelevant because it is not a general purpose system. So packages of software built for this won't be installed on Debian anyway - why worry about it?

Bo Thorsen.

Comment: Journalism at it's worst (Score 1) 193

by thorsen (#29347599) Attached to: How Hollywood Tie-Ins Saved Lego

If the journalists would actually have bothered looking at the last years numbers from Lego, they would have seen that the turnaround is due to a much much lower cost than ten - fifteen years ago. Their revenue numbers have been pretty stable for the last twenty years. But they spend *half* what they did in the mid ninetees.

This is the reason Lego has become profitable again. Not Hollywood.

Although I can see why stupid journalists would prefer the other story. *sigh*


Comment: Certainly not! (Score 1) 794

by thorsen (#28292485) Attached to: Should Undergraduates Be Taught Fortran?

There are problems, where fortran is a better (or at least probably a faster runtime) solution. But teaching fortran to every undergraduate would be a big mistake.

They should be taught how to program, not how to do it in fortran. (And if you don't understand the difference here, you don't understand the problem.) Use any kind of language that is easy to teach and learn, or something that is used regularly out there.

Anyone programming fortran or cobol (same issue, just with banking instead of physics) will tell you that it takes about three weeks to teach a decent programmer how to do this language as well. But if you start out by teaching them the old school stuff, there is almost no way to get them up to speed on todays programming styles.

So teach them how to do proper programming, and make specialized courses for those very few who needs the legacy languages.

Bo Thorsen.

I never cheated an honest man, only rascals. They wanted something for nothing. I gave them nothing for something. -- Joseph "Yellow Kid" Weil