143 posts • joined 6 Nov 2012
Re: hold on...
> I wouldn't teach Java either. It only just got lambdas, for christ's sake.
And the first thing a beginning programmer absolutely needs to know about is closures and anonymous functions.. Sigh.
People often dismiss it, but there's no better language than pure C for learning basic procedural programming. It's simple, fast, and universally supported. Grab a GNU/Linux distro, install GCC and VIM, and away you go. A lot of people seem to be championing the idea that programming must be dumbed down to a reductionist agenda, and I think that's a mistake. Nothing worth learning is acquired that way.
The fact is, a lot of student won't be interested in the science of computing or programming, just like many aren't interested in physics, chemistry, or maths. Spoon feeding them a simplification of the subject matter won't change that reality.
Re: The 'sanity at last' release.
>> See, Microsoft? that wasn't so hard, after all, now was it.
Microsoft never does anything for 'users', only for itself. In the case of Metro, it thought it could foist its fisher price touch UI onto its desktop monopoly in the hopes of imposing familiarity and luring mobile users into the platform. It didn't work. That's the problem with having OEM monopolies. Companies like Microsoft can do what it likes without consequences because no one challenges it. The sooner the desktop market dies the better.
Misuse of Word
They're all clueless. That's not hacking. Hacking is the act of changing the behaviour of a program by modifying its source code. Cracking is the act of bypassing the security of a system, usually by guessing a password (dictionary attack) or exploiting some kind of inherent and superficial weakness. That's my definition anyway.
Software is the real problem
Even ignoring the ridiculous price, weight, and poor batteries of these things, the software is just horrible. I'd rather have my whole body waxed than have to use Windows 8's Metrosexual UI. And the desktop doesn't lend itself well to touch. So anywhich way you look at it, the experience is substandard compared to ordinary laptops (including Chromebooks) and competing Android/Apple tablets.
Re: No Surprise Er...
>> ~90% of that energy is going into the oceans - and more than was expected is going into the deep oceans due to specific wind conditions. Average global temperature is still climbing.
Actually it's not. The measurements taken (even deep sea), don't support that theory. The testimonies to MP's confirms this. Professor Lindzen was on that panel.
And it begs the question, why? So for 100+ years, the full effect of Co2 warming has been reflected in observed temperatures, but all of a sudden, when they become stagnant, it's all going into the oceans? I'm sorry, even to the most ardent and unquestioning AGW believer, that must seem very convenient.
Proponents of AGW theory are in a scramble trying to explain and account for the distinct lack of warming for the past 17 years. They're claiming everything from the oceans, to the wind patterns are responsible for absorbing the extra heat. Is it not possible that climate sensitivity to Co2 was actually very low all the time, and the warming we have observed over the past 150 years is primarily due to natural variability? You'll never hear any of them admit to that being a possibility.
Re: On the whole
>> Since the majority of the panel seem to be fairly well educated, even if not in a scientific subject, I would suggest they are all bright enough to make a fairly sane assessment of the situation.
I guess you didn't watch the video on youtube then. It had the MP's questioning IPCC supporters, and sceptics. The Chairman and the Scottish guy in particular came across as clueless to me.
Re: No Surprise Er...
>> Would it be more accurate to say that less then 2% of papers studied had an opinion that humans were not responsible for climate change?
Would it be more accurate to say that only 0.5% of abstracts assessed agreed with the IPCC's position that human activity is responsible for over 50% of warming over the past century? Because that's the real figure when the wide range of opinions aren't conflated like John Cook et al did to arrive at his 97% consensus. That's right, only 64 abstracts out of 12000 made that assertion. Not quite a consensus that mankind is the primary driver of climate change is it?
That's what many people fail to see in the alarmist argument. They hear about anthropogenic global warming, and assume all warming is due to man's activity (Co2). That fails to take into account natural variability. The reality is that even the IPCC has had to reduce its climate sensitivity figures (forcing effect of a doubling of Co2). It's still too high though.
Will a doubling of Co2 cause some warming? Probably. Is it responsible for all the warming observed over the past 150 years? Certainly not. And anyone who tells you otherwise is lying. We know this because if Co2 was the primary driver, then the last 15 years should have seen large temperature increases (we're pumping out more Co2 now than at any other time). As we all know, that hasn't happened. The models failed to predict it because they assumed climate sensitivity (to Co2) was much higher than it is.
So whenever someone tries to conflate the arguments that a doubling of Co2 causes some warming with mankind being the primary driver, take pause and and ask does correlation imply causation. That's the argument being presented here.
Similarly, if someone suggests that the majority of (often quoted as 97%) scientists agree that we are the main cause of warming, don't take that at face value. It's a statistical lie. They conflate a broad range of opinions, most of which don't believe that mankind is responsible for more than 50+% of observed warming, into a single "Endorse" result. So you'll see something along the lines of:
'97% of scientists endorse manmade (or anthropogenic) climate change'. This implies that they all support the idea that we are responsible for most of the warming. That's completely fallacious. That statement would include scientists who think we probably contribute 1-2% of the warming. A trivial amount. It gives a completely false picture of a consensus.
Re: No Surprise Er...
>> We (the scientific community) came to consensus decades ago.
I've seen no evidence of consensus. Only that fraudulent 97% John Cook et al paper that dismissed over 60% of climate based abstracts. Regardless, there's no such thing as a consensus in Science. It's an appeal to Argumentum ad populum - a logical fallacy.
I'm not at all surprised that the non-scientists on the panel all agreed with the IPCC. They're the ones pushing for the carbon taxes and punishing of ordinary people.
> Microsoft and other companies clearly have lots of applicable patents / IP that are likely to apply to Linux
If that list released by the Chinese is anything to go by, it's the usual vague, overly broad, and obvious concepts that Microsoft has been patenting for years. Any two-bit programmer would come to the same conclusions independently. But that hasn't stopped them from spreading FUD that Microsoft somehow owns those concepts. What a joke.
Just recently, Microsoft's FAT patents were invalidated in Germany. They can claim infringements all they want, but the truth is, Microsoft is a patent abuser and convicted monopolist.
Re: It is not a cancer - Microsoft is the real cancer
> Spot the non-dev 4000 miles away. C# runs the roost in modern software on windows and linux.
Complete and utter BS. C# doesn't even exist compared to C, Java, Python, Vala, and a whole host of other infinitely more popular languages. Someone would be crazy to invest their time or career into that patent encumbered non-starter when we have so many FOSS tools at our disposal.
You sir are the non-dev who knows nothing about the world outside of the declining Microsoft platform. This is clearly a desperate move by Microsoft to try and keep itself and its development tools relevant in a world which has long since abandoned it.
Let's see what the future holds for someone investing their time and skills in the Microsoft platform shall we?
1. Windows 8/Metro. Well that complete and utter disaster speaks for itself. The store is like a ghost town with the only thing of significance populating it being tumble weeds.
2. Windows Phone. That 3% and declining marketshare mobile platform that no one but Microsoft cares about.
3. RT. Was DOA. It will disappear completely in a few years once Microsoft gets fed up of pouring billions into a blackhole.
4. Surface Pro. What's the point really? If you want a laptop get a good ultrabook/Mac, if you want a tablet, get a real tablet like a Nexus or an iPad. This thing doesn't know what it wants to be. And it's still stymied with an horrendously bad OS called Windows 8.
5. Xbox. That's right, the platform that's more expensive, technically inferior to the competition (PS4), and once again has the Metro-sexual UI. I'm looking forward to when the Steam Machines are released and rip the console market to pieces.
Did I forget anything? If you want to waste your career, time, and money learning a dead platform, then go right ahead and invest in C#. If you've got something between those ears you'll avoid Microsoft's little experiment where its developers are the guinea pigs for the latest attempt to regain relevance, best give it a pass.
> to the success of Xbox
If you call losing $2 billion a year a success, yes. The loss is hidden by Android patent royalties.
Re: cygwin shell
> These days a fresh cygwin install gives you mintty, a superior terminal based on PuTTY. If you're still suffering the old cygwin terminal, get it installed :)
I haven't used it for some time so I didn't know that. I'll have to give a try again, thanks :)
Kill it with fire!
Cygwin is about the best it gets on Windows unfortunately. And even that's in a horrible bog standard Windows console. After using a Linux terminal it's like long nails on a chalkboard.
Even if you can get past PowerShell's fisher price UI, you're got to deal with an excruciatingly verbose syntax, that's ostensibly designed to cause as much RSI as possible. It's awful really. I pity the poor soul who has to use that monstrosity on a daily basis.
Re: Probably the death knell of the "industry"
> Google clearly ripped off Java from Oracle, and the day of reckoning is coming
Android was using Java before Oracle even acquired Sun Microsystems, the company that actually designed Java and also the company that gave its blessing for Google to use it.
> Google are already getting spanked by Nokia, Microsoft and Apple for exactly the same type of behaviour.
Take a look at OS marketshare and ask who's really getting spanked. From the look of things, Microsoft's in a death spiral, Nokia's already collapsed because of its decision to go Microsoft platform exclusive, and Apple's sales have been stagnating for some time. Why do you think the aforementioned companies have resorted to the legal system to fight their competitor? Because they're getting spanked.
Who cares about corporate IT? They're a decade behind everyone else. They'll still be stuck with Windoze while everyone else has moved on.
The Windows hegemony was crumbling long before MS made their office suite available online. LibreOffice, Google Docs, ChromeOS, Android, SteamOS, Ubuntu, the list of competing systems goes on and on. I doubt Windows will even exist in the consumer space in ten years.
Re: Too little too late? don't be preposterous!
>WinPhone nwo has over 10% UK market share! And over 10% of the EU big 5 too.
That's a complete and utter lie. In Germany it's hovering about 5-6%, and Germany is the EU's biggest economy. I'm sure that inconvenient truth won't stop you fantasising.
Re: Lots more than that -
>They also open-sourced Roslyn (the C# compiler written in C#), they've open-sourced WinJS, and introduced .NET Native. And then of course there's Cortana...
There's a difference between open source and, free and open source. In Microsoft's case, the former is encumbered with patents. So take a good look at Android and Linux, and watch how Microsoft asserts its patents to rid itself of competition, then think again whether or not it's a good idea to adopt Microsoft technologies.
I for one won't touch dotnet with a ten foot barge pole. Its cross platform support is sketchy at best, and the patents that surround it are concerning to say the least; especially when Microsoft's past behavior is taken into account.
FOSS technologies are the future, not proprietary, patent encumbered ones like Microsoft produces.
Too Little Too Late
In all honesty, I think it's too late for Microsoft. The world has moved on from Microsoft's proprietary API's to FOSS solutions like Android, ChromeOS, Ubuntu, and SteamOS. Who really needs Windows these days? Some might say the enterprise, but I don't think the enterprise really matters because they're always a decade behind everyone else. Eventually they'll catch up as well, and they won't be going Windows that's for sure. Business, governments, etc always eventually follow the consumer trends. Especially since BYOD and cloud computing now do most of what traditional fat clients used to do.
The ability to patent a finger gesture says all that needs to be said about software intellectual property - it's a complete farce. It's no different than trying to patent genes.
XFCE wins hands down
Ever since I set up my system with Arch Linux and XFCE, nothing's been able to tempt me away. I get a four second boot from grub to a fully working desktop (Vertex 4). I have yet to see another configuration that gives me the same performance, ease of use, stability, and compatibility. Most apps integrate well with XFCE, and there are many designed specifically for it, such as XFCE theme manager and Whisker menu (a real gem). I also like the well thought out built-in XFCE-4 apps. The optional compositor deserves a mention as well.
Re: Wow! That many people moved to KDE or XFCE?
Yep, I moved years ago. XFCE is stable, performant, and doesn't get in your way like Gnome's new workflow.
Re: Why permit the secrecy
> Even if most consumers don't care, we should still be able to obtain a list of which patents there has been paid royalties for with every gadget we buy.
MS would lose their advantage then - which is, without knowing the patent claims, you can't work around them. From what I've seen, most of their licensing deals revolve around FAT based patents, most of which have been invalidated in Germany already.
> And as if they care much whether you think they're making money from Android patents anyway! Yes, yes - Microsoft developed an entire phone line and integrated API and spent a massive fortune buying part of Nokia because they're shy of people knowing they make money. Of course they did.
MS are using Android royalties to prop up the loss making division that produces XBox and Windows Phone. If they weren't shy about it, they'd list it in their financials, not bury it away in order to hide losses elsewhere.
> Windows Phone is probably just smoke and mirrors to cover up it's Android revenue generating patents.
That is true. If Microsoft didn't make Windoze Phone, they'd be classed as a patent troll. In fact, some people think that's the case despite its failed phone efforts.
> Gartner estimates the cost of upgrading a Windows XP machine at between $1,205 and $2,069, for a 10,000-PC environment.
Really? And that's just upgrading? Someone's making a fortune here.
As far as upgrading hardware, I see they never considered installing GNU/Linux on existing hardware, saving the taxpayer a fortune in the process. Absolutely not, let's all just keep perpetuating the Micro$haft monopoly and depending on a single vendor for everything. Nothing could go wrong there could it?
Success Story Eh?
Like the big six energy cartel is a success story or perhaps Murdoch's News International? The government is propping up monopolies left, right, and centre.
I'm sorry to say, but at least if BT were still nationalised, all money earned from this tax payer funded infrastructure would go back into the system instead of lining the pockets of fat cat bosses and shareholders.
Wouldn't it be interesting if we had non-profit companies running our utilities whose only mandate is to keep the lowest price possible while continuous improving infrastructure for everyone. It will never happen of course, because Cameron loves to waste other people's money (tax payers) on helping his corporate fat cat friends in banking, energy, and other sectors.
This is the reason I don't vote. I don't support the currently representational paradigm. Get all these career politicians out of decision making.
> So - it's lazy good-for-nothing PAS suppliers to blame for this putrid stinking mess - mostly.
Wait, some idiot in the NHS must have approved the idea of purchasing crappy IE based and other proprietary Windoze based software to begin with. That's where the blame lies.
1. The NHS shouldn't be using Windoze full stop. It's a malware magnet.
2. They definitely shouldn't be using IE or any other non-standard and proprietary web platform.
If they continue using MS software, which is inevitable considering our government loves to choose the most expensive solutions, then when it comes time to replace XP, they'll have to replace every single PC. That's going to be one hell of a bonanza for Micro$haft and its avaricious resellers.
It's such a sad situation because all those XP machines could be repurposed for GNU/Linux and given a new lease of life. It would save millions. But as we know government isn't interested in saving money unless it involves stripping citizens of essential services and welfare.
> Windows Phone beats BLACKBERRY
Isn't that what's commonly called a hollow victory considering that between them they constitute only 6.3% of the market? The fact that Windoze Phone actually lost marketshare in Q4 2013 suggests it's actually reached its peak despite Nokia virtually giving away 520's and other low end phones in Asia and Europe.
>Office 365? I thought they were dropping all the Microsoft tosh.
Governments seem to act like crack addicts when it comes to Microsoft. They just can't seem to wean themselves off them.
It's clear the problem lies with the procurement process and the fact that Microsoft has a legion of partners (shills really) that they use to bid for government contracts. By comparison, FOSS suppliers are massively outnumbered. A similar tactic was employed while trying to ram through the ridiculously complicated (6k pages by all accounts), proprietary, and patent encumbered OOXML.
>What utter rubbish. We are still on target for at least 2 Degrees Centigrade global warming of average surface temperatures by 2100.
Do you ever listen to yourself really? No one can predict what it's going to be like in five years, let alone 76. As stated in the article, all the models assume a linear growth pattern. It never pans out, and every model that's overlapped with the present has been completely wrong.
IPCC reports are poorly written works of fiction.
Re: 20g of "processed meat"
>Fresh meat - straight from the carcass is usually fine
Yes if you like contracting diseases like Taenia Saginata. The same applies to fish as well. Always freeze / cook that stuff well folks.
AGW religious nut claims debunked by climate scientists haha, so so ironic.
>A review by an independent vendor (HP)
Are you serious? HP is Microsoft. 99% of their products run Windows and Micro$haft software.
He's what a M$ or a vendor pushing M$ products report will always include:
1. ** Retraining costs associated with migrating to Linux. This is basically where they claim all those additional costs will come from.
It's completely bogus though. Every new version of Windows or M$ Office requires retraining, and some might argue are even more of departure from the normal workflow paradigm than switching to Linux/Libre Office. Metro and the Ribbon alone are so far removed from the previous versions that the Linux desktop and Libre Office software are much easier to pickup. Thus it's more costly to retrain in M$ and their every-changing and radical UI overhauls than to go FOSS.
2. ** Document conversion costs. This is another bogus claim. How many times I've seen incompatibilities between different versions of M$ Office file formats. Safe to say, M$ doesn't include those costs in it's assessment of continuing to use its products.
Then there are the savings associated with migrating to FOSS:
1. Licence fees. There are none for software like LibreOffice.
2. Retraining costs are lower going from XP to desktop Linux than from XP to 8. The same applies going from M$ Office 2003 to LibreOffice than 2007+. Metro / Ribbon changes are so alien to users, it's like starting from scratch, whereas, the FOSS option is very familiar.
3. Hardware can be repurposed. There's no need to buy all new hardware when FOSS has lower system requirements than Windows.
4. No risk of malware, rootkits, NSA backdoors. The NHS just recently was infected with malware on their XP systems. You can bet that M$ never includes those costs when it sponsors ROI reports about migrating to FOSS.
5. Vendor neutral standards like ODF, and the plethora of office suites which implement it, guarantees future accessibility, and competitive prices for support contracts.
6. Security. All code can be audited unlike proprietary products from Micro$haft.
Re: It's not a feeder for Windows Phone
>you have to be bonkers to believe that one in ten people have a Windows Phone in the real world. 1% is believable.
The funny thing is, Nokia's almost giving away the loss making 520's, and still can't get any traction, let alone get back to Symbian levels pre- Stephen "the Trojan Horse" Elop.
> Hmm, always the same old wording time and time again. It's as if someone is being paid to comment.
I've noticed that too. Seems like we're being invaded by Microsoft reputation managers lol.
Thank you Paul and the reg for reporting on this important issue.
Microsoft doesn't want choice, it wants everyone to be reliant on its file formats so it can force vendor lock-in. For years MS has had a monopoly over governments, businesses and individuals for this very reason. If non-proprietary and patent free formats like ODF become the standard, users can interact with government using free software like LibreOffice; thus going a long way to dismantling Microsoft's iron grip on productivity software.
Re: You gotta be kidding
> You're joking about not having an understanding of the basic physics behind what has been dubbed the "greenhouse effect", right? You're kidding about not understanding the fundamental physical mechanisms behind the effects that carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and other anthropogenic fun stuff that are increasing in concentration have in our atmosphere?
The earth is not a closed system like the experiments performed in the lab on the effects of CO2 etc. A runaway greenhouse effect observed in a closed system lab does not mean the same thing will happen in the complicated climate of the earth. Correlation does not imply causation, which is unfortunately what most of the CO2 and AGW hysteria is based around; the assumption that what happens in the lab under strict conditions will reproduce themselves in the real climate.
>but you can't refute the calculable effects of radiative forcing.
The keyword there is 'calculable'. RF theory in climate science is based on the observed effects of Co2 in the lab under controlled conditions. The earth doesn't operate under controlled conditions, which is why every single, yes you heard it right, every single climate model proposed by AGW alarmists that's overlapped with the present has been wrong, and not by a small amount either, we're talking about 500% deviations from what's actually been observed.
If you can show me a single climate model that has predicted past, present, and future temperatures, then I'll admit I'm wrong.
Re: Doing the Warmist shuffle
>Weather forecasting is excellent in the tricky environment of the UK. and Climate Modelling is really easier than weather forecasting.
Yes climate modelling is much easier because the people doing it don't have to explain themselves when it turns out to be wrong in 10, 20, 30 years.
Lacking the ability to predict weather (forecasting) accurately indicates a fundamental disconnect between our understanding of the forces and variables involved and how it really works. If someone can't predict if we're going to have a hot or wet summer (MET Office), then they lack the credentials to say what's going to happen thirty years in the future; and we all know that we've got a better chance of getting a summer prediction from a fortune teller than the MET Office.
Re: Doing the Warmist shuffle
>or skilled climate scientists?
Ha, more like skilled climate politicians. Calling them scientists doesn't make them so. I'd put more stock in physicists, mathematicians, and geologists, than some recently made up science category.
They're skilled all right, at hiding the decline, manipulating data, calling weather climate when it suits them, and whipping up hysteria to maintain and increase their funding.
These so called climate scientists are no different than Al Gore; looking to exploit fear and uncertainty about the unknown with their dire predictions of apocalypse if citizens don't get on the carbon credits con band wagon, subsidise green energy, and create energy taxes.
Re: The Big Elephant in the room
> I just spent 5 seconds looking at your posting history.
And 5 seconds looking at yours quickly reveals your pro-M$ anti-FOSS stance. I am pro-FOSS, I don't claim to be otherwise, can you say the same?
The Big Elephant in the room
It's a shame the EU can't tackle a real monopoly and its abusive practices, namely Microsoft.
Strange Going's on
> I cannot understand some voices [such as Microsoft] that have been involved in previous Article 9 commitment decisions, that now appear [to suggest] that a commitment decision is not an antitrust decision. I cannot understand this.
I can. M$ want to punish Google, and they'll never be satisfied. They want to drag this out and force as many fines, conditions, and impediments as possible on Google's search business. And after that, they'll setup more proxies like FairSearch and ICOMP and go after Android as well. What's more concerning though is that Micro$haft seems to be dictating the terms of this antitrust investigation. Who's in charge of antitrust here? Europe or the American monopoly known as Microsoft?
It only has instructions for Windoze and OS X. Guess I'm Sh*t out of luck then because I run GNU/Linux.
> Check out the site with images turned off.
Or with Noscript installed.
Re: QUOTE: and could be learned in a day.
>> Soooooo, why can't she code then if it can be learned in a day?
Politicians don't actually do anything. And that's what she is. It's just another money making scheme to scam the taxpayer.
Waste of Time
I cringed at that video. They're all completely clueless.
There was one guy who knew what he was talking about, the young blond haired guy. It's about relevancy. Schools mostly teach things without practical application, relevancy, or a sense of discovery. It's all premeditated, irrelevant, overprescribed, and teaching for the sake of teaching.
>> Surely, the NHS /UK Gov are large enough to develop their own OS and software?
They could with all the money they waste on M$ software. Not to mention all the new hardware they have to purchase to run M$' latest monstrosities, as well as having to deal with malware infections etc.
Re: Real life example
>> Some web based applications will work using compatibility mode but others will not, there are problems with getting some NHS wide applications with Win7 64bit as well.
This is everything that's wrong with government right there. Designing webapps for IE negates the whole benefit of doing them in the first place, which is platform independence. Your webapps don't even work across different versions of IE. If the developers had written against the W3C standards, they could just use a different browser.
The whole Micro$haft obsession in UK government makes my blood boil.
- +Comment Trips to Mars may be OFF: The SUN has changed in a way we've NEVER SEEN
- OnePlus One cut-price Android phone on sale to all... for 1 HOUR
- MARS NEEDS WOMEN, claims NASA pseudo 'naut: They eat less
- Back to the ... drawing board: 'Hoverboard' will disappoint Marty McFly wannabes
- Vid Google opens new Inbox – email for people too dumb to use email