Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


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:Nokia is dead (Score 1) 212

"Partnering with Google, porting QT to Android, merging all cool meego functionality into Android, and cleaning up your product line didn't ever cross your mind, Nokia?"
Why would Google accept this? They own the android platform - and it is a platform. It has everything from the touch interface right down to the OS Kernel - why would they need QT or anything from Meego? The truth is, in the mobile space, QT is a solution looking for a problem. Winblows 7 mobile, IOS and Android are full stack systems, they don't need another API layered on them, much as hard-core /. geeks might wish otherwise.
OTOH, I also don't agree with the opinion expressed elsewhere in this thread that stock android with Nokia specific customisations (which don't include anything from QT or Meego) would have been impossible. Nokias strength has always been their hardware, there's no reason they couldn't have become the premier vendor of Android handsets.

Comment Time Lag (Score 1) 365

from TFA; "Rosario Rodriguez said her daughter, Araceli Beas, posted that she needed to go to the gym as she sat in her car while waiting for it to warm up outside her boyfriend’s home near East 80th Street and South Commercial Avenue last Dec. 27. Beas struck Raymond Veloz about two miles away near 92nd Street and South Ewing Avenue, police said at the time." Also from TFA; "Police cited Beas for failure to avoid striking a pedestrian. Beas and the driver involved in the minor collision with Veloz told officers at the time that they had been temporarily blinded by the sun." Far from an open and closed case, I'd say, but then, WhaddaIknow?

Comment Re: Same Old Story (Score 1) 1018

Ages ago, in a different lifetime, I was taught that there are four so-called "factors of production"; Land, Labour, Capital and Enterprise. Land for the physical space to make things, Capital to finance the work being done, ("investment") and Labour to make whatever is being made. All of these organised and co-ordinated by "Enterprise". I'm guessing, that while you fulfilled the "Labour" part of the equation, and were paid a salary for so doing, whoever had the idea to make these condensers, and was willing to take the risk to make that idea reality, and organise the financial backing reaped the Entrepreneurs reward.

Comment Re:Duh...Faux (Score 0, Flamebait) 428

Murdoch's terrible Faux News was on the TV in the bar last night and gees, if anyone would have talked about Bush when he was in office the way Murdoch's "news" station talks about Obama, Faux News and the neocons would have called them "traitors" and screamed bloody murder.
That's absolutely correct. He wants to tell people what to think and when to think it. And gets outraged when they don't comply.

Decrying the Excessive Emulation of Reality In Games 187

An editorial at GameSetWatch makes the case that game developers' relentless drive to make games more real has led to missed opportunities for creating unique fictional universes that are perhaps more interesting than our own. Quoting: "Remember when the norm for a video game was a blue hedgehog that ran fast and collected rings and emeralds? Or a plumber that took mushrooms to become large, and grabbed a flower to throw fireballs? In reality they do none of those things, but in the name of a game, they make sense, inspire wonder, and create a new universe. ... We’ve seen time and time again that the closer you try to emulate reality, the more the 'game' aspects begin to stick out. Invisible walls in Final Fantasy, or grenades spawning at your feet when you go the wrong way in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 are examples of kicking the player out of that illusion of reality, and letting them know that yes, this is a game, and yes, the rules are designed to keep you in the space of this world, not the real world. In reality, as a soldier I could disobey my orders and go exploring around the other side. I could be cowardly and turn back to base. Games shouldn’t have to plan for every eventuality, of course, but it’s not so hard to create universes that are compelling but where the unusual, or even simple backtracking, is not so unfeasible."

Comment I agree (Score 1) 548

I agree. A good library or Framework allied with the basics of the language and some knowledge of best practice probably go a lot further than people give credit for. I too learned BASIC (BBC-Basic) and had a lot of fun with it. Was taught PASCAL and Modula2, but I struggled with C. Pointers and memory management and the lack of instant feedback that you get with BASIC really put me off. I spent years with some 4GLs and database specific languages before a very well structured, framework heavy proprietary OO language eventaully took me to Java, which is where I am now. However, I will be revisting C and ObjectiveC in order to do something with the iPhone. It's not nearly as daunting now as it once was.

Comment Re:Because? (Score 1) 587

I'm not really sure how your point applies to the current discussion...

Well, the FSF philosophy of "Software wants to be Free" is a blanket which applies to all software, even when it makes no sense to apply that philosophy. As I pointed out elsewhere in this discussion, there's really no difference between cloning an operating system from open code and cloning a software platform from an open api. Philosophically, however, RMS deems the open API clone to be morally wrong in this case, because the API is controlled by Microsoft.
I guess my point is that there are a lot of grey areas which this black and white philosophy doesn't really fit. Finally (before I butt out!) the End User of a nuke system isn't necessarily the owner of that code, but your stipulation of "wanting the ability to be absolutely certain of where it[the nuke] will go when they push that Big Red Button" would probably be covered by a restrictive "non-Free" licence. :)

Comment Re:Because? (Score 1) 587

If you're properly rewarded (compensated) for the creation of your program, what right do you have to impose additional restrictions on me, the end user?

You, the end user, may not be the owner of the software in question. In that case, I have every right to stop you from fiddling with the naviagtion software for my nukes, or the avionics software in my aircraft, or the transactional software in my payment settlement system.

Comment Re:Because? (Score 1) 587

I guess the difference is that Gnash guys hate Flash with passion, whereas Miguel & friends recommend the technology they work with as reasonable choice for new development.

So, Gnash is OK because the developers hate Flash because it's proprietary to Adobe? This whole thing is truly laughable. I don't see how reverse engineering a platform from an openly published API spec is any different to reverse engineering an operating system by reading and understanding its source code. Maybe Stallman really did hate UNIX after all.

Slashdot Top Deals

"In the face of entropy and nothingness, you kind of have to pretend it's not there if you want to keep writing good code." -- Karl Lehenbauer