deadcyclo

I must admit that I preferred the "old" new one. Really can't put my finger on why.

I'm interested in the impact on users when one changes things several times quickly like this. Anybody here that has knowledge/experience that would like to say a few words about it. Personally I always am annoyed by change, more so when things seem to change "all the time". Anybody have some actual statistics on how people reacted to this type of design changes?

I completely agree with you. On the other hand, good knowledge and understanding of them can be very useful when formulating ones own arguments.

But running around telling people their argument is invalid because it is X, simply makes one look like an ass.

I think you are missing the point. The apple guidelines do not state that a program can only consist of an executable. That would not make any sense. Rather they state that any application can only consist of a single executable in addition to whatever resource files are included. In the case of the Latex distribution in question one would have to convert all 100 executables into one executable, my guess would be perhaps 100 megabytes. In addition one would have to include lots of resource files, mainly sty-files bringing the whole bundle of an executable + resource files up to 4GB.

AFAIK Apple doesn't restrict you from bundling files in your application. That simply wouldn't make any sense.

The point here is that he is talking about an application consisting of a single runnable binary of size X with tons of bundled .sty-files that brings the whole application up to 4GB.

Previously, this would not be allowed, since .sty-files are interpreted (which in turn would make it impossible to implement LaTeX on the iPhone), but that really wasn't the point here. The point is simply that this wouldn't be a single 4GB executable, but a an executable of perhaps 100MB bundled with a whole bunch of .sty (and other) files to a total size of 4 GB.

Edit: Fixed typos. Sorry. HN doesn't work very well on my phone.

Well you obviously weren't careful enough. Nowhere in the article does he talk about a 4 GB binary or binaries. To quote him:"A 4GB Tex distribution dependant on over a 100 binaries" He is talking about the _whole_ distribution not a single or several binaries. So even though you were careful, you still misquoted the article.

Don't think that is the case. It was limited to merchants in a few countries, but it was not limited to US customers. I once purchased a computer from UK using Google checkout, and I live in Norway.

How ironic. They talk about providing the best user experience on the web, yet their site offers a sub par experience on my phone. The text doesn't scale when zooming, so basically it's unreadable on the phone.

This article on its own simply makes no sense. First he talks about the launch of GNNS and apple including support for glonass, without mentioning any of the benefits (if producers include chipsets for multiple location estimation methods end users can expect more reliable, stable, and in some instances, more precise location estimation).

Suddenly, out of the blue, he claims that this will create an arms race to produce disruptive location based services. A claim, that on it's own, simply doesn't make sense. Further he claims that the downside is location based ads, as if this is some kind of new concept.

None of the "conclusions" in this article seem to make any sense.

Yeah. I read that. But I'm mainly into academia. So I'm not really referring to my professional life when I call my self a programmer, though I do program in my professional life as well. Just like I call my self I write when referring to my hobby/side-job as an online journalist.

I have much the same history as you. Started out in basic, but turbo pascal was what really got me going. I must admit that sometimes I really miss those days. But then I remember the horrible feeling when the diskette and the backup diskette with my hard work died, and suddenly I don't miss it that much after all.

Hmm. Nibbles.bas and gorillas.bas are probably the main reason why I'm a programmer today.

AFAIK, based on the last talk by RMS I attended he condoned copyright on works of fiction only, not on works of fact. So no copyright on manuals, textbooks, scientific articles, etc.

I hear you. I too cringe each time I see a post about RMS here. I know I "have" to read it, at the same time as I know I will get angry and extremely disillusioned about mankind doing so.

Personally I'm not a huge fan of RMS. I agree with a lot of what he says, but at the same time I cannot agree with the way he presents it. There are two reasons why I am a member of The Linux Foundation, and not the FSF, and their names are Richard Stallman and Matt Lee. Though I feel very strong about the motives and ideology of FSF, I simply cannot condone their way of presenting them. I personally feel that RMS does as least as much to harm their goal as to aid it, and I find ML to be horribly hypocritical. No matter how much a disagree with how their do tings, I would never disrespect them as human being. But sometimes it feels like I'm alone in the world. Everybody else either adores them, or tries their darndest to disrespect them.

This is in no way unique to HN. I see it everywhere. Even in the media (here in Norway). Last time RMS talked here, all of the important IT-related media where represented. (And I noticed immediately that they were more concerned with their beers than actually listening). The articles the day after were horrible. RMS had talked about some really far out there, fairly absurd stuff, and some really smart, realistic stuff. Every single media gave their best effort to make RMS look like a loon. _None_ of the smart, realistic stuff was mentioned, even with a single word, anywhere. An they had twisted the far out stuff, to look even worse. One of them seemed even to either not have listened to a word, or was simply making stuff up. RMS said at least 6 times specifically: "I'm not talking about Micropayments, I'm talking about making pay what you like/can easier", "Don't confuse this with micropayments", etc. Yet this journalist managed to write a half an article about all of the stuff RMS had "said" about micropayments.

But it has further use as well. You can have your own personal identity on your gmail address and your official corporate identity on apps. Mixing roles is never a good idea and g+ on apps makes it easier to avoid.

Not quite sure about this comparison. AFAIK Ghandi is famous for living by example. I have never heard or read about RMS saying anything about living by his example. I have however, heard him talk about that he lives by his own principles because they matter to him. And he tells you explicitly what he considers you to be, if you have other opinions than him.

Last time I went to one of his lectures he clearly stated that you should do you best to avoid using proprietary software _for your own good_, while he said that creators of proprietary software were evil.

I have a hard time seeing this as hypocritical, unless he actually goes on record stating that «you should not own a mobile phone, and you should never ask to borrow a mobile phone when needed».

This blog post is just silly, and in my own opinion nothing more than failed linkbait. In no way, shape, or form is this hypocritical. By borrowing a phone, RMS is not making the person he is borrowing it from more trackable. They already made up their minds to own a phone, thus being trackable. Neither is he making it easier to listen in on them (he actually is making it harder). Finally in no way, shape, or form is he making himself more trackable by doing this.

The only way a could consider this hypocritical is if he asked to borrow a phone from somebody who at all times turned their phone of, and only briefly turned it on to make calls. But I'm rather sure that if he asked to borrow a phone from somebody, and their reply was, "sorry, I would rather not turn it on because I don't want to be tracked", he would respect that.

You can't blame that on Stallman. He has always been completely clear and up front about what he will and will not speak about. And he always agrees on the topic ahead of time with who ever is arranging the event.

In other words. Who ever arranged this graduation obviously did a horrible job, and is the person you should blame.

Here in Europe I have seen lots of smart use of QR codes in advertising lately:

- Scan the QR code to receive a rebate coupon for the product advertised - Scan the QR code to receive a two for one deal on tickets for what ever event advertised - Places like 7-eleven offering you a free soda with your hot dog if you scan the QR code on the poster in the window before entering - Scan the QR code for an exclusive trailer for the movie advertised - An ice cream company introduced a new ice cream and you could scan the QR code on the advertisement to get a free ice cream - Adverisements for universities where scanning the QR code would let you order their information brochures sent home to you - Scan the QR code to be informed when the advertised service is available in your location

And several other uses I can't remember at the moment.

My point is that it is, like the author of the article indicates, quite possible to make great use of QR codes in advertisements.

Many of the mentioned campaigns I also know worked great. For example during the free ice cream campaign, the local 7-eleven was filled with teenagers with smartphones getting their free ice cream every time I went there.

I've also noticed that most of the campaigns that succeed don't "just slap a QR code in their", they give you information about it: "Scan the QR code to get a free ice cream using your cell phone. If you have an iPhone go to xxx to get a scanner, if you have an Android xxx, if you have a Nokia xxx" or similar solutions. It's kind of a chicken and egg problem. Nobody will use QR codes if they don't know what they are, or how they work. And nobody will known what they are and how they work, unless somebody tells them.

Try attacking it from a different angle: The first thing he does is post a link to a google blog post that clearly states that they are releasing a new and changed version of google reader, and later on talks about changes to the API can ruin peoples businesses.

Now, if he really was talking about google reader being retired, and not just the API, that would mean that he in no way, shape or form could have read the blog post he himself initially posted a link to.

My best guess is that it simply is a poor choice of words, and that he figured since he was posting on the webpage of the API, he simply skipped the word API.

Try looking at it again:

It's posted in "Friends of the Unofficial Google Reader API"

and he says: "I realize that we're using an unofficial API, so we have no right to complain about any changes to it (instead we should be thankful to have been able to use it for so long). But at the same time, the Reader team is well aware that developers such as myself are using their API in our software, and some of us rely on this software to generate an income."

Hmm... To me it seems like the similarity is simply that both use a typical 3 column layout. Mountains of molehills?

The title here is misleading. The guy is asking if the unofficial google reader API is being retired, not if google reader is being retired. (Google reader is getting an overhaul to fit googles new design and some of the social bits are being moved to google+)

At least here in Norway, most banks provide multiple ways of easily transferring with a phone: SMS, Android and/or iPhone apps and mobile web pages. My bank has all of these options. All four options in addition offer transferring between ones own account, retrieving balance, etc. The Android and iPhone apps and the mobile web pages offer more advanced stuff like paying bills, etc. as well. They even offer purchasing stocks and maintaining ones stock portfolio.

So you signed up for community testing a product, and you don't bother to report problems? That just seems wrong to me (but I know, it's probably a rather common thing to do).

That sort of seems like modifying FOSS and not bothering to contribute back your modifications to the original product because "from experience most FOSS projects don't bother about my code". (And yes, many FOSS licenses require you to provide your code if you distribute. They don't, however, actually compel you to actually submit it to the original project.)

In my eyes, it's about common courtesy: If you sign up for testing a product, you report your findings. That said, I'm not saying you have to, I'm just saying that by providing your feedback, specially when they actively are seeking it, you might help create a better product.

I completely agree. This would be the one killer feature that would take g+ over the top. This would simply render g+ superior to all other social networks.

I'll turn it around. The only features of office I really like is the spell/grammar checker. I really wish MS would sell it as an independent application that can be used with any text application. Also, excell is OK, but other than that I really don't like office.

I'm very uncertain of the usefulness of this. Do people really do this type of research on their phones? I could see myself using something like this on a computer, but not on my phone. I would think my notes on the phone would be more of "remember to research Obama". Now if this app was synchronized with a desktop client with such features, I could really see myself using it.

I'm with you all the way, though I'm neither your typical user. I'm most definitely getting the N9 as soon as I can, and I really hope Meego survives. If nothing else I hope the community steps up and keeps it alive, while Nokia (or somebody else) if nothing else continues to provide hardware.I had nothing but Nokia phones from 1997-2010, but my last phone was an HTC, and unless Nokia keeps Meego alive, I'm pretty sure the N9 when I get it will be my last Nokia. It's been some enjoyable 13 years...

That's my beef with them too. I prefer text emails, since I do a lot of my email reading on the CLI. It's true, and annoying, that a fair amount don't include multipart/alternative sections. For me it's not a huge problem as I have plugins that will extract the text from the HTML and present the text only, but it's not exactly a great reader experience.

Much much worse, however, are all of the people/companies that include multipart/alternative sections, but do it completely wrong: "This is an HTML-email. Your client lacks HTML support. Please visit [url here] to view this email" or even worse "This is an HTML-email. Your client lacks HTML support. Please upgrade your software".

I come across these almost daily, and it bugs the hell out of me. Unless it is something very important (bill, sign-up email, etc.) I simply ignore these emails, and they never get read. (Yes, it really is out of spite. I'll ignore them when reading email in a web client or on my phone later. They simply lost their chance)

I don't really like HTML mail, but I can live with it. I see the reason why it exists (great for advertisement). However, if you use HTML email, do include multipart/alternative section for non-HTML clients, and include the same information there, non of this "your client can't handle HTML, you loose crap".

It's really interesting how the article reads as a reply to (most of) the comments here on hackernews and not the other way around. I have a feeling that a lot of people commenting here simply read the title and nothing more. Otherwise, why would you put forth an "argument" which is exactly one of the arguments discussed in the article as false? I'm probably going to get heat for posting this, but I feel it's kind of ironic. Normally HN gives me a good extension to the article in question: Other ideas, other points of view and expands on the article. Not so here...

Exactly my experience as well