"Bing, people have seen is a better search product ."
So it's true - he's really lost it
This was the week when US President Barack Obama let everyone know that Google Hangouts are a thing! POTUS indulged in a little "Fireside Hangout" to chat about issues raised in his earlier State of the Union address. When asked about software patents and the patent snarking that goes on, Obama came down hard on patent trolls, …
So it's true - he's really lost it
Maybe you're just using the wrong frame of reference - I think you'll find Bing is considerably better than both Altavista and Excite.
"Maybe you're just using the wrong frame of reference "
But it's been mentioned before that a card index is better
It's that culture of lies again.
While not my first choice Bing does deliver different result sets on the first page that are often buried on page 44 of other search engines.
I'm glad Bing is there. It provides another tool to use if the first one doesn't work.
Sounds like El Presidente and Facepalm need to be looking as some Raspberry Pi....
BTW there are ~7m kids in the UK. At £25 a pop, that's £175m to give every kid a computer to muck about with and do something interesting - why hasn't it been done already?
Unfortunately it would probably be a waste of about £100M...
While I agree about giving kids more experience of programming and the nuts n bolts of computing. To say they should have no experience to the commercial world of software is just plain ridiculous.
Look at the biggest names in open source software and they're all big commercial operations. Google, Oracle, IBM, Red Hat.
While you might think we live in some sort of hobbyist world where everyone compiles their own kernel and rolls their own distro the reality is people buy commercial software, have service contracts in place (with SLAs for timely problem resolution) and there is a lot of outsourcing.
There is nothing particularly unique about a raspberry Pi which means it is more suitable than a desktop machine running Linux. It's just the Pi is cheap to manage and the software can be busted and replaced in minutes by installing another SD card.
To be honest i'd rather they taught kids the actual basics of programming from the ground up.
Learning on any other software platform teaches you how to use that platform, learning how to build electronic circuits themselves teaches how to truly use logic gates, calculations and so on and to do it at the base level.
If you understand how to "programme" an electronic circuit, the logic is transferable to all programming languages, teaching the base level logic gets rid of the majority of bad habits in programming, not least the "throw more/faster hardware at it" approach we've had for too long on all platforms.
The main thing everyone is forgetting is 50% of the population find logic and mathematics difficult to impossible (the foundations of programming). I would not like to say teaching from an early age wouldn't improve this but teaching can only go so far. Intelligence across the population is not uniform and until we raise the base line from moron, 50% or more of the population will simply not grasp what is beeing taught no matter how long or how good the teaching manics employed are or the tools used.
Lets face it the UK as a whole is full of Paris'
For a start you need to add the cost of a monitor, keyboard and mouse at minimum, that significantly increases the cost. Then there's the logistics of enough power sockets and where they gonna put all this stuff when not in use? Sure they could get the kids to plug them in instead of the PCs in the IT class rooms but then, you could just boot linux off those machines and save £25 on the Pi... Lets not start on can all the teachers use them well enough to teach programming.
If kids are growing to grow up and do great stuff, they'll have to learn to do it using the tools they are given, get for free or steal. It takes a LOT more than some flighty tech to make a successful entrepreneur. The real world give exactly zero fucks about tech stuff, it just wants the work done.
I'd rather they wasted £100M on RasPis that some kids may not use than several magnitudes more on failed government IT projects. If doing that gets even a small number of kids to be interested in computing and create their own tech start ups when they grow up, the return on investment will dwarf the waste. Kids are smart when given the right tools and support: http://youngrewiredstate.org/
Should we teach and or not?
Unfortunately you can patent whatever you like when you control the guns. I think half the problem is there is a large number of people who are under the false assumption that everything needs to be owned.
But yes. Software and method patents are broken and are in danger of dragging the entire patent system down around them, if they haven't already.
If patents were what they should be, NPE's would not be such a bad thing -- they would just be one way that inventors could monetize an invention. NPE's would not just sue people, but actively market their patents to try to get actual manufacturers to use (and thus license) the inventions they have under their control.
Unfortunately, it is far to easy to get patents on simple things, and having a patent gives you far, far too much power to extort companies and enterpreneurs that have already invested heavily in using an idea that they didn't know was patented. The costs of inadvertantly infringing some nonsense patent are far too high, and it is almost impossible not to do so.
These root causes have to be fixed, and the NPE problem will go away. Conversely, you cannot fix things by just attacking NPE's, because they are just a symptom, and not the root problem.
Another ineptly handled fool fest of corporate moronity....
"Yeah Yeah - hey they have all bought out mobile phones...... (5 years later)
Yeahhhhh I have an idea, lets bring out a mobile phone too!!!"
(The crawlers chorus)
"Ohhhhh William - you so just like umm Rock daddy oh."
Windows Mobile along with Symbian was one of the earliest smartphone platforms. 2002 was the year one of the first Windows Mobile phones was released, but the OS itself had been on PDA for much longer.
The first Symbian phone was in 2000. So Microsoft wasn't that far behind.
It was when Apple redefined the smartphone in 2007 that Microsoft took their time to respond.
Google are the late comers, they didn't have a phone of any kind until 2008.
True my friend. It wasn't Microsoft was late to the party, it executed it's own party poorly and almost crushed the PDA/Early-smartphone market into submission because it was very terribly run. Sometimes someone else has to make a mistake first before another company can learn from those without any cost and then succeed (like Apple's case with the iPhone). Right time, right product, right opportunity.
Google just took the easy option and sold Android to the cheapest bidder (open-source parts of it). Anyone will be happy to take software for nothing.
Android hasn't done so well because it's open, it's done so well because the cost to enter the party has been dropped. At the time of it's launch, the only other realistic option was Symbian, which Nokia controlled tightly and didn't listen to anyone about how it should be developed. Win Pho was still Win Mobile on version 6.5 and had been for 3 years or so. iOS was a closed system. Google offered a unified market that anyone could enter for buttons - you could even use the OS unbranded if you wanted to do without the Play Store (Market as was).
As to Gates and the internet *everyone* missed the internet, which is why it was the wild west for 15 years or so before gub'ments started to actually take it seriously enough to start legislating on it. In 1995, when that book was released, most of the internet was a text driven space (given that at the time the highest speed modem was 33.6kbps and ISPs cost a fortune). Simple 800x600 JPEGs would take a minute or so to download - why would anyone think it would be a big thing?
Eadon - No. Gates saw the opportunity to sell his version of DOS as the crème of the crop. Kickstarted the x86 revolution and got his software into millions of businesses, homes and wherever else in the world. If he wasn't visionary, then what was he? His clever licensing schemes were just as visionary (at the true consumer birth of computing where he needed customers to trust him) as Apple's leaps in mobile tech in the 21st century. Maybe Gates got lucky he had a very clever team programming what he needed to succeed. Obviously now the tables have turned for the better IMHO.
Gates and Balmer are friends. That's a different issue altogether. If Gates can't put business over his friendships at the top, that'll crush his precious company slowly.
Stop the anti-M$ and get back in your cot with dummy in your mouth. Or at least suck your own thumb for 5 minutes. It's getting boring.
Black badge please!
Well what WAS Microsoft doing in all that time? Oh that's right...they had the Dragon Lady (Roz Ho) utterly destroy Danger, which helped their braintrust run over to Google to create Android. And then Roz Ho fumbled whatever the hell Project Pink was supposed to be, leading to a Kin-tastic Krash-and-burn in the market.
And yet she still hasn't been fired. I wish I could fail upwards like that. And we wonder why Microsoft has lost it's edge? The rot goes deeper than Ballmer.
Sorry Eadon - Gates knew exactly what the internet was but he couldn't own it so he tried to kill it by making use of his near monopoly of the pc world: ms java, ms jscript, activex, a whole host of 'standards' that MS wrote but couldn't even read and wasted a hundred thousand careers.
If you want visionary go read about Leo - if MS ever get the computing to the level Lyons managed on a couple of thousand valves in 1960 we might be entering a new age in IT instead of arguing over whether the dandy or the beano is a better model for a space station....
> Google are the late comers, they didn't have a phone of any kind until 2008.
Yes they did, they had the iphone.
It ran google search, google maps and gmail.
What else would google want? The only reason android exists is because Apple wouldn't continue to use Google services of its own accord.
> In 1995, when that book was released, most of the internet was a text driven space
Errr - your Internet seems to be a little different to mine...
Back then APT meant (for a few gricers anyway), Advanced Passenger Train.
Coat, gone down the pub even though it is early, it is the last friday of the month.
What this whole mobile drama is basically showing is that Microsoft has no feel for innovation what so ever. Sure; they have some nice ideas and such here and there (sometimes controversial; look at the ribbon for example) but basically nothing fully innovating.
Look at their mobile stuff; at first with CE and Windows Mobile the whole idea was to make the phone look and feel like Windows. Including the start menu. Sometimes that really didn't add up at all. And don't get me started on that stupid stylus you always needed...
Basically: their main revenue came from desktop and as such everything should be modelled after it.
Now they finally discovered touch and found a pretty good working interface for their phone. I really like Metro on the Windows Phone itself since it allows you to quickly add and remove stuff and in general gives you quick access to the features you quickly want / need to access.
Yet now they're trying to go the other way around; it seems MS puts more value into mobile than desktop and as such, you guessed it, all should be based on the mobile segment.
Basically; they hope the new revenue comes from mobile and as such everything should be modelled after it.
So; what happens when it turns out they're wrong and the desktop segment turns out to be larger than anticipated. Or worse; it doesn't WANT to be "pushed" ?
MS didn't miss the bandwagon; they simply ruined all the opportunities they had.
Three mindless jerks who need to be the first put up against the wall when the revolution comes.
"but the way that we went about it didn't allow us to get the leadership"
Excuse me?! Listen Billy the street punter thinks mobile, they think iPhone, Blackberry, Android, then you start to get names like Nokia, Samsung, etc mentioned then finally after that lot you get Mr Average Punter thinking, "Really the Windows computer people actually make a mobile phone do they? Well I never!". Honestly, two of my relatives have said almost that exact phrase. Average, typical street punters think Windows=Computer, let alone even remotely thinking about Windows=Mobile Phone!