God knows we could use some smarter mice.
God knows we could use some smarter mice.
I'd say it's more accurate to speculate that they have the Win 8 source code and will roll out their own.
I recall a couple years back that MT has the second lowest per capita income in the country, to which I say "Thank God for Mississippi!"
No. I think it's time to consider QA to be a profession on equal footing with Dev. One can then select QA people based on aptitude and training, rather than taking somebody who is a recent grad, and hope they'll not resent being in a QA role while waiting for a Dev role to open for them.
I recommend Quincy Washington. There are a few data centers here already. The power is cheap. The thermal management is good. http://www.coloandcloud.com/editorial/quincy-wa-big-data-centers-leverage-abundant-inexpensive-renewable-energy/
Scott, Don't be sorry for his irrational reaction to an opinion piece.
I don't know what you have against stupid people. We all can't be smart like you. Unfortunately, your disrespect to the author has eclipsed any argument you have made against the subject of the original piece. So rather than address your arguments, I will point out your attacks and bias. This is not to say you have no valid points. It is simply to discredit you as a critic. I have no intention for this to be fair or balanced.
"The person who wrote the Icon article is so stupid he went and wrote an article on himself about stupid people." This statement indicates the theme of your attack. It reveals your ignorance, as basic internet research would show that the author is far from stupid. Further, equating people who have no history with the items that are the subject of the icons, with "stupid people" leads me to conclude that you are unable to discern the difference. I suspect that we'll see more of this failing in your analysis.
Your inexplicable reference to Seinfeld, and your profanity laced statement did not appear to relate to the article under review. It did reveal your distaste for a cultural icon, and separates you further from your audience. This paragraph confirms your hatred for stupid people. Calling Seinfeld a retard again indicates your ignorance of the people your are writing about. Obviously the man is intelligent, and works hard for his success. Your reference to the speed of aircraft in controlled airspace was yet another distraction from any point you were trying to make. At this point, I must recommend a college-level course in critical thinking.
The following paragraph appears to be a rant about cars that start using a button rather that keys. Of course you took the opportunity to call some unknown engineers "retard" and "insane". Another slam on people you have never met, and using the ever popular grade-school term "retard". That of course, is a slam against retarded people, typically those with downs-syndrome. Of course those folks can not help their condition, but that doesn't stop you from using such an offensive term. At this point, your credibility as critical writer is question. We'll see if you can pull it out.
Your statement about the shopping cart icon was thoughtful, and actually contributed something. The following paragraph is more evidence of your bias, strictly opinion without any reference to the original article, or the subject under discussion.
The paragraph on the floppy icon was truly bad. Rather than argue that your sample space is limited, I'll point out your habit of calling another person an idiot, followed by your continued use of profanity; always the mark of an intellectual. That was sarcasm.
The critique of the authors use of the term "radio button" was especially lacking. Of course nobody suggested that a user would know that these are radio buttons. The author is aware that the people reading his post will probably know, and added a picture of a radio next to the user interface, not to mention that he explains the reason for this term in the article.
Once we get to clipboard and scissors paragraph, we are treated to your rage against the author, complete with 'yelling' (all caps) and yet more profanity. Once more, your have done nothing to move the conversation forward.
Then we get to hear about your rage level. Apparently this article has effected you on an emotional level, if not a logical level. This explains your failure to critique the article, so far.
Then we see you actually slam the author, suggesting that he was born without a brain and grew up and wrote the article that you are 'critiquing'. Again, had you done basic research, you would know that his claim to fame far exceeds a simple article on the anachronism of the symbols on icons. Research appears to be beyond your capability. A confusing paragraph about trains in Holland follows, then more ramblings about CD icons, and music, and something about Karaoke. Your statement that the author hasn't provided a good example to illustrate his point makes it appears that you haven't even read his article. There are clearly many good examples.
Now we get to the part where you suggest the author put a screwdriver though his brain. Whatever credibility you may have had is now gone. You have convince nobody with your writing that you are superior to anybody, least of all Scott Hanselman. In fact, I challenge you to show your drivel to your mother, and listen to her review of your work.
You know, I have come to conclude that this review was so hateful, that there is obviously something else going on. I wonder if it's a irrational hatred of his employer, or did he beat you up in second grade? This was clearly not a reasonable response to an article on icons, but was instead a hit piece on a guy who has overcome a lot of challenges, and continues to inspire a lot of us in the technology community. I wish I could say the same for you. I wont.
Yes. We must be very diligent to spend effort to minimize our use of these rare and precious memory. We must save memory for future generations, because if we're not careful, we'll run out. It's become so expensive at $10/GB. What will we do? Help us!
I have a solution. License and update Android with
There will be more off-loading of specific types of tasks as GPGPU becomes more mainstream. One of the things that will be driving wider adoption of GPGPU is better support in tooling. The MS supported extension to C++ called AMP should enable many more developers to take advantange of DX11 (or better) hardware for non-graphics work. It looks like support for AMP will be in Dev 11. If Ivy Bridge has DX11 support with more than a few GPU cores, then Ivy Bridge users should bennefit.
Fortunately the 80387 preceded the Pentium floating point bug, so they may actually be accurate.
I have inherited obsolete laptops recently, and few have Win7 display drivers available. I can install Win7 and VGA, but accelerated graphics is more important to me, so I install XP.
What's he got against us Computer Scientists? I protest this slam against hard-working people of my profession! Besides, we need phones too!
Yet another questionable assertion that OSS==GREAT && CSS==BAD. I wonder if haveing acces to the source code is all that important. Lotus was 123 great, in spite of not having access to the MS-DOS source code. Same with Turbo Pascal. How about Real Player? Yep. Visio (shapeware)? Yep. WinAmp? Again, yes. Chome browser? You bet! Again, access to the OS source code would have brought these projects next to nothing. They were/are great in spite of having no access to the windows codebase.
I don't get the statement "Microsoft could probably do a great mobile platform, if they were willing to sacrifice the desktop".
What does it mean to "sacrifice the desktop"? Stop releaseing OS for desktop computers? Seriously? Why? And who's going to fill that gap? Linux? Really? Which distribution? You can all agree on that?
Why would walking away from the destop suddenly enable MS to be able to great on great mobile platform? Are they resource constrained? Are they constrained by management? Perhaps that would free some of those Windows designers to work on this forthcoming "great mobile platform".
I hold the opinion that you can thank MS for the fact that we have a dominate desktop hardware platform, and that you can get these amazing devices at the prices you can. I believe that they enabled the commodization of personal computers, resulting in defacto standards, low prices, and phenominal increases in performance. Truly, you can be critical of MS in their failure to stay relevent in the mobile space, as well as the stagnatin of innovation of the browser. While we may dis-agree on what constitutes a "great mobile platform", I hold that the WP7 is evolving in to that even as I write this. I expect that WP7 and then WP8 will be very competative from a developer and performance standpoint. I make no predictions on market share, or app-store anti-trust issues.
If bankers can count, how come they have eight windows and only four tellers?