How exactly does a factual statement, "Microsoft cut off security fixes for Windows XP, except to some big users that pay exorbitantly," cause Fear, Uncertainty, or Doubt?
Are you really uncertain about whether Microsoft will EOL your current Windows version, or what that will mean for legitimate businesses who need it to continue to function?
If you don't want to hear what the FSF has to say, that's fine. But their statements are carefully worded in the hopes we can have a calm, logical discussion about the issue -- user freedom has become impossible with Microsoft's latest OS.
The low-barrier-to-entry plays are getting lots of attention, while the ones that take more capital, research, a breakthrough, or all three, are also getting some attention.
The article also simply states the obvious: trivial stuff "is trivial."
This "culling of the herd" can happen continuously, or there can be a flood of investment leading to a bubble. Lots has been blogged about how to make different mistakes , how to think different , or just how this time will be different .
>"the employees snuck this by us. We had no idea. Absolutely no clue whatsoever. Pinkie swear."
That's how I read the headline. Good thing I wasn't in mid sip when I read it. You can imagine what would happen to an engineer that tried to bring that up. I swear you can smell that dynamic at a company within fifteen minutes of walking in the door.
 Seriously this sort of stuff happens, the board members should be banned from serving on a board of directors again.
It won't be long before their email servers are going to be impounded. I assume they've long since been scrubbed of evidence but then there are the backups. It's going to be very tough to keep that house of cards standing if it isn't grounded in fact.
Personally I wouldn't write a line of code like that even when authorized by management, I'd rather resign (but then again that's a argued from a position of relative luxury), but I hope that German programmers working for VW or Bosch would want to see some very explicit authorization that this is exactly what it is they are supposed to make with a note to the effect that they believe this is not legal or ethical or both.
If not they may very well end up holding the bag, I have no doubt that this thing will be researched to the bottom.
Thought too. But in my opinion, an OS has larger responsibilities when it comes to improve inter compatibility, instead of breaking things to have developers who stay loyal and ending up with apple-exclusive software. I really wonder about the value objective C brings, especially since NextStep did not work as a project. You can't always put the fault on library devs.
What boggles my mind, is that OSX is an unix underneath, so I don't understand why it would do anything different and force developers to learn new habits. That's not how you attract devs. Apple has made an habit to break backward compatibility, something neither linux nor windows tend to do.
I think it's not so much to think that OS manufacturers should not to be different than their competition by separating even how their development tools work. The only objective of that is to have developers who stay loyal to apple because they can't have their app running on both windows and mac. Not to mention I had to re do everthing at each new XCode version.
So in the end, having my project run on both XCode and MSVC, was too much time lost, so I just sold that aging laptop. Apple is just so special, and I guess I was not good enough for that.
Yea, 10 minutes of flight time seem incredibly high to me. That means you could significantly increase it with external fuel tanks (say, for a total of 20 gallons). 15 minutes would be a darn long jet pack ride. Limiting factor is actually just how much weight you could plausibly carry on your back.
Or, more likely, they can't get involved for legal reasons. If they took steps to block the easy stuff, an arms race would ensue, and the content providers would never be satisfied with the performance being provided forfree by Google. The content providers would always demand stricter enforcement, and could threaten to sue for copyright infringement regardless of merit.
I think if that were the case they would not have pushed out the "Panda" updates which penalized content farms so heavily. If their past behavior (with content farms and other "low value" content sites) is a guide they will not do anything until enough people complain about it.
In the mean time it isn't even Google's content so its not a hosting issue, they are just the "neutral" third party providing their 10 blue links (oh and supplying the advertising engine those sites are using)
Any time I see an article claiming Microsoft's app store and XBox will wipe out Valve, I remind myself that it's not Microsoft's direct counters to Valve, it's Microsoft's sheer size that will create the openings Valve needs.
The OS group is undoing all the progress the XBox group has won.
I think it is mostly to pay and retain talent. They are giving employees stock options and those are not worth as much if stock prices do not go up.
Anyway Alphabet stock is still undervalued specially with their investments in Uber(google fund), Magicleap, Google Fiber, Google self driving cars, Nest, Renewable Energy, Health Sciences. Once Alphabet starts reporting all these separately it stock prices are going to hit $1000 or more.