Comment Re:In (sovjet) russia... (Score 1) 913
P.S. I actually did see a funny and witty comment on
/. a few days ago.
Link, or it didn't happen.
Here's one
Well, I thought it was kind of funny.
Comment Re:The April Fool (Score 1) 1582
All right! Wait, is this The april fool thread?
Comment And so it begins... (Score 1) 199
"How will it end?"
"In fire"
Comment Re:But do the Minis come with a Remote? (Score 1) 519
Apple Remote would cost you $20 extra.
Comment Re:Misleading story (Score 1) 300
"In December 2006, Palm, Inc. paid $44 million to ACCESS for the rights to the source code for Palm OS Garnet. With this arrangement, a single company is again developing Palm hardware and software. Palm can modify the licensed software as needed and it need not pay royalties to ACCESS over future years."
--Wikipedia, no citation given.
--Wikipedia, no citation given.
So it sounds like palm did decide to pull the plug, the new agreement gave Palm rights to the source code (again).
Assuming it's true, how much money was involved in splitting palm up, only to reunite (sort of) later?
Comment Re:Apple learned previous lessons (Score 1) 449
It's not the 1st time Apple does something like this. Years ago after "borrowing" Xerox's GUI they copyrighted the "use and feel" of the Lisa and Mac GUI.
Apple paid xerox in apple stock, to let their engineers see what was going on - so I don't think stealing is the right thing here.
Apple's copyright was invalidated by the time Windows 3.0 was released.
Apple's copyright wasn't invalidated, there was a contractual agreement between microsoft and apple that allowed microsoft to copy some elements of apples design. My understanding is that the contract was supposed to be for developing apps for the mac (apple's side of things), but microsoft claimed that it protected them in windows too. The judge agreed with microsoft in some places, threw out claims in others. The original lawsuit's copyright claim wasn't even considered, as it all became a contract dispute.
Comment Re:Sci-Fi movies (Score 1) 449
My understanding is that the modern water bed wasn't patentable because Heinlein had described such a bed in enough detail in some of his sci-fi books (stranger in a strange land and Double Star) to be considered prior art. So there is some precedent for using sci-fi concepts as prior art.
see wikipedia entry on waterbeds
Comment Re:this comes as no surprise... (Score 5, Insightful) 361
Microsoft uses the point system so you can pay for things over multiple platforms xbox, zune etc.
You know, Cash works for that too.
Submission + - Mac OS X and Font Smoothing
Piroca writes: Font smoothing in OS X is one of the worst aspects of the system, yet few users dare to complain about it. The rationale behind Quartz font rendering is that anything in the screen should be rendered as they would while printing. Apple decided to turn off font hinting and perform anti-aliasing indiscriminately, thus adding artifacts to horizontal and vertical lines. It happens the end result is that fonts at small sizes are blurry and not very easy to read (which is exactly the opposite result expected from the anti-aliasing strategy, and renders the crispness of LCDs useless). Apple has been heavy-handed about this issue since OS X 10.1 by not acknowledging it and not providing configuration options to turn off anti-aliasing in small fonts while providing font hinting and choices for system fonts (the ubiquitous Lucida Grande is not hinted therefore it looks wrong when anti-aliased) as the old System 9 and Windows do. This situation is unlikely to change anytime soon (Leopard won't do anything about it, at least). For me, this is a problem because I have to develop on OS X and keep starring at blurry fonts the whole day gives me headaches. I'm pretty sure other developers out there have the same problem, therefore here goes my question: what do you do to cope with the troublesome font smoothing in OS X?
Will OLPC's 'Sugar' Have an Effect on Other OSes? 59
g8orade wonders: "As a recent article notes: for the OLPC, the software is more important than the hardware. A generation or more of children in developing countries will learn about computers using a computer that doesn't use a desktop from either Apple or Microsoft. Will the OLPC software finally be the license-less tool, the uncharged-for value add that raises the bar for other OS makers to compete, given the same hardware?"
Submission + - Microsoft Versus Iowa
eldavojohn writes: "Microsoft is currently laying out its class-action lawsuit defense in an attempt to prove it didn't overcharge Iowa consumers for Word, Excel & Windows software to the tune of $329 million since 1994. As a result, a memo has surfaced (possibly to be used as evidence) from 2004 in which Allchin, the co-president of Microsoft's platform and services division, wrote: "In my view, we lost our way ... I think our teams lost sight of what bug-free means, what resilience means, what full scenarios mean, what security means, what performance means, how important current applications are, and really understanding what the most important problems our customers face are. I see lots of random features and some great vision, but that does not translate into great products." This has been an obvious common complaint from Slashdotters that Windows distributions often came with more undesired features and abilities than bug & security fixes."
