Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Confused (Score 1) 319

The problem is not limited to Microsoft stories.

There are stories on all topics that make no sense. I don't know much about how these stories get selected and edited, but couldn't /. hire editors that know the basics of the technologies so they can weed out stories that are fundamentally wrong or that make no sense?

Comment Aren't they all (Score 1) 79

I generally assume that any endorsement has some sort of commercial arrangement behind it. The only exception would be a recommendation from a friend and even those can sometimes be suspect.

Now, I don't mean to belittle this issue - the clear separation of paid and unpaid content is extremely important - but the stuff in this example doesn't seem that bad. Consider, for comparison, the lack of disclosure involved in political blogs and other online media...

Comment Re:This is the right way! (Score 1) 170

He already had an enormous number of shares, the eyes of the tech world on him, and the biggest company in the world at his command, and you're suggesting there wasn't sufficient motivation???

If he didn't want this job, and intend to do his absolute best even without this additional bonus then he shouldn't have got this job.

Comment Re:Nothing to see here (Score 1) 267

As a Google fan this is exactly what I want them to do: get real and start playing the game.

Google should maintain their general position that the patent system is badly in need of reform and patents shouldn't be used in place of competition, while at the same time playing the patent game like the rest of them.

You might see that as hypocritical. I see it as working within the system as it is, while trying to change it.

It's like their position on Flash: they don't really like it and are doing a better job then anyone else of making it redundent (by driving forward open technologies) but they support it because users still want it.

Comment Aren't they all doing that sort of thing? (Score 1) 364

Microsoft is still using revenue from Windows and Office to fund its other adventures, including Windows Phone.

Apple's virtual monopoly with iPod/iTunes funded (and led to) the iPhone/iPad/App Store.

Also, I would argue that Google has a clearly stated plan to make money from Android while continuing to give it away: advertising. So, it's not like they are giving it away to achieve dominance and will then start charging for it.

Comment Have we learned nothing... (Score 5, Insightful) 159

Wow! CTO of company that makes money selling security software for Android says that Android has security problems!

If you think you can get honest and objective info about this problem from the CTO of a company that is in the business of selling solutions to the problem, then you should not be allowed to use the Internet.

I'm not saying that there isn't a problem - I'm just saying that this is so obviously the wrong source that it is no better then an advertisement.

Comment Re:Price you pay.. (Score 1) 114


First off, let's note that this /. article is about a Trojan that is not in the Android market. Publishing an article about that is just stupid scare-mongering. There could be millions of viruses/trojans outside the market and I wouldn't care. What matters is when they get into the market.

Now, back to your trade-off.

Google can and should make the Android market 99.99% free of trojans/viruses. Free enough that I can recommend the Android market to my proverbial mom or uncle and know they will be safe. (Some would argue that they already have - the number of downloads of malware from the market probably represent close to 0.0000% of market downloads.)

And they can do this while still keeping the market 'free'. Because, as in most countries, freedom and free speech don't mean you can do/say anything. There are limits, but the limits are (supposed to be) clearly articulated and implemented, and should have widespread support.

So, if Google eliminates all malware and anything else that breaks the laws of my country or your country (this part is not resolved yet), and if they are transparent about this, then I would argue that we still have a free market/platform and we didn't have to make any trade-off that we don't already make in living in a democracy, free, society.

Comment Not really (Score 1) 47

I thought iPhone mobile browsers were all just wrappers around Safari but without access to the latest optimizations (there was some hubub a few months ago that the alternate browsers were all slower then Safari)?

So, this would have no relevance for developers targeting the web since they all use the same core and have the same user agent (we are still talking iPhone).

Android, of course, is a different story.

Comment As long as upgrading is easy... (Score 1) 282

Frankly, I don't care what numbers they use for each release, I just make them to make it simple to keep up-to-date. What's good about Chrome is not the frequent releases, but the fact that I don't have to worry about upgrades in spite of the frequent releases.

One thing that is quite annoying is the calls I get from users who are being prompted to upgrade Flash, Adobe Reader, or Java. It makes it harder to train users not to install stuff and to take any system prompts seriously when they are frequently presented with these prompts. Another good thing about Chrome is that it includes Flash so that gets taken care of automatically too.

One of the worst offenders, I'm afraid to say, is VLC. I think VLC is great, but their upgrade process is very awkward.

Slashdot Top Deals

"The following is not for the weak of heart or Fundamentalists." -- Dave Barry