Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:The authorities decided not to prosecute (Score 1) 439

I also read an article in the July issue of Popular Science that says that right after the disaster, the Japanese government doubled the amount they listed as the "safe" amount of radiation per year.

Only to match the international standard for emergency workers. Before the accident the mandated limits were much lower than the international norm.

I see a lot of people implicitly conflating TEPCO and its subcontractors with the government. Both have demonstrated incompetence and dishonesty a-plenty, but this incident, like most of the really shady stuff going on, was on the TEPCO side (specifically one if its subcontractors).

Comment Re:s/driven/killed/ (Score 1) 488

and the company has driven innovation for decades

Uh... geez. Where to even start?

The first and last real MS innovation was the Microsoft BASIC interpreter which became ubiquitous in 1980s home computers. Everything else they ever did was shamelessly stolen and/or bought and/or badly copied from others. Even MS-DOS started out as a bought-out CP/M imitation.

...

MS has always been a follower at best. It has frequently been a predatory abuser of its monopoly. It has usually parasitized on the innovations of others. Embrace, extend, extinguish was always how they operated. It has never been an innovation leader.

Actually, Microsoft did pioneer one major innovation, one which has driven most of the software industry for decades. And that's their development/business model.

Before the MS era, large-scale commercial software was expensive. And it was expensive because it was written according to rigorous processes. Writing software is easy. Writing stable and reliable software is hard, because most of the effort goes into the comprehensive design, verification, and QA that's necessary to make it truly reliable. And that costs money, which has to get passed on to the customer.

Microsoft's great innovation was to realize that, rather than spend a small fortune buying 99.99999% reliable software, most people would rather pay a fraction of that amount for 98% reliable software. It's that last 1-2% of quality control that costs most of the time and money in development. So Microsoft decided to shortcut it and sell cheap software to the masses. And people demonstrated that yes, rather than spend $1000 on an application that never crashes, they'd prefer to spend $100 on an application that crashes sometimes but can get the job done if they're careful to save early & often.

We don't have to like it, but this was an major innovation, and it did shape the computer industry for decades. Innovative doesn't necessarily mean good.

Comment Re:OS/2 Lesson: Legal & Copyright hassles (Score 1) 234

Neither Serenity, nor Mensys who now has ownership of eComStation, has the OS/2 source code (beyond what IBM already disseminated via the device driver kit, or open sourced a la JFS). What they have is an OEM license, not a source license. The major system-level enhancements in eComStation were mainly done through add-on device drivers which add to or even supersede the IBM components; the desktop enhancements were done by subclassing, which is possible due to the object-oriented structure of the Workplace Shell. I'm sure Mensys would be as delighted as anyone to see IBM open source OS/2.

IBM does indeed make money from it still, not just from royalties on eComStation, but also directly from selling more OS/2 licenses and support contracts to their existing customer base. On the other hand, that wouldn't necessarily change if the OS/2 source code was released - IBM prefers to make its money in support rather than software anyway.

The real problem is the legal cost of open sourcing it. The code would have to go through a full technical and legal audit and cleanup first, and that means not only a lot of programmer-hours, but lawyers. Lots of lawyers. Lots of lawyers equals lots and lots of money. Maybe not a fortune relative to the depth of IBM's pockets, but it would still require some very compelling arguments (probably with a lot of zeros attached) to convince them it was worth it.

Comment OpenOffice for OS/2 (Score 1) 341

This is basically how the OS/2 port of OpenOffice.org works.

The company that sells eComStation (OEM version of OS/2 with updates for modern hardware) funds the OS/2 port of OO.org. Anyone who buys eComStation 2.x automatically gets an OpenOffice for OS/2 support contract which includes full binaries. Also, anyone can elect purchase just the OO.org support contract (with binaries).

Meanwhile, the source code for the OS/2 port is all checked in to Apache's repository along with everything else. So anyone can grab it and build it if they have the know-how.

Most users seem fine with this arrangement, as it keeps the OS/2 port funded and alive.

Blackberry

Submission + - With BB10, RIM tries to break out of the "mobile ecosystem" model

Alt-kun writes: "This past week has seen a couple of interesting articles about Research In Motion's strategic plans for BlackBerry 10. The Globe and Mail thinks that by pushing HTML5 for app development, they want to make mobile applications platform-neutral, which would let them sell devices purely on the strength of the hardware and OS, rather than on the ecosystem. And the Guelph Mercury notes that they also plan to push BB10 as the basis for a whole range of mobile and embedded devices, not just phones and tablets. One example shown off at the recent developer conference was a Porsche with a BlackBerry entertainment system."
Blackberry

Submission + - Playbook OS 2.0 released: native email, Android app support (theglobeandmail.com)

Alt-kun writes: "As of February 21st, The Blackberry Playbook has finally received its long-promised overhaul. Called Playbook OS 2.0, this major upgrade provides native email and calendaring apps, limited support for Android applications (the developer has to repackage the app for the Playbook), and a bunch of other features. There are some fairly positive initial reviews, although one can no doubt expect a lot of too-little-too-late naysaying from various quarters as well.

The Globe and Mail article also contains this somewhat interesting note:

until RIM began deep discounting ... the device languished way behind rivals such as the iPad in terms of market share. One recent report by Toronto-based Solutions Research Group, however, pegs RIM's share of the tablet market at around 15 per cent, a big jump after discounting over the holiday buying season.

"

Android

Submission + - Kobo to release Android tablet e-reader (theglobeandmail.com)

Alt-kun writes: Like Amazon last month, Kobo is now making the jump to an Android-based tablet e-reader. Priced at $200 and available on October 28th, the Kobo Vox is set to complete with the Kindle Fire rather than the iPad.

While Kobo can't match up with Amazon's sheer mass of available content, it is partnered with various major book sellers and has a good-sized base of existing customers. Also, previous Kobo products have made a point of supporting open standards for media, and that will presumably continue with the Vox.

For those who aren't familiar with Kobo: they have little presence in the US, but their e-readers are fairly popular in Canada, Australia, and a number of other countries.

Slashdot Top Deals

There are no games on this system.

Working...