|
Post by bigbalou on Jul 6, 2009 10:35:15 GMT
Hi,
I re-discover my collection of "Lone wolf" last week.
I'm a Google Android plateform for smartphone developper and I wonder if some project was initiated to put the DS version to an another plateform like Android or Iphone?
May be can we collaborate to submit a project to the ADC2 (http://code.google.com/intl/fr/android/adc/)
let me know
|
|
|
Post by jellyfish on Jul 7, 2009 15:08:31 GMT
Presumably someone specifically paid for the rights to produce a commercial app? Is this something to do with the fact that all iphone apps have to go through the iphone store so they're all commercial even if they're free? Sorry, I don't own an iphone or do development for it, so I'm very hazy on the legality issues.
|
|
|
Post by outspaced on Jul 7, 2009 19:08:55 GMT
Yes, I think so. Another reason why the dislike Apple-philes have of "Micro$osft" for being overbearing control Fascists escapes me. (Personally, I think both are crap.)
|
|
|
Post by jellyfish on Jul 7, 2009 21:29:43 GMT
Whoa, that sucks. Go android.
|
|
|
Post by Taryn on Jul 8, 2009 3:31:46 GMT
Yes, I think so. Another reason why the dislike Apple-philes have of "Micro$osft" for being overbearing control Fascists escapes me. (Personally, I think both are crap.) Uh...go Linux? I used to use Linux a lot but went back to Windows because Linux is still rather hard to use to install programs and such for non-turbogeeks. And Macs are too expensive...
|
|
|
Post by wisekai on Jul 8, 2009 8:26:59 GMT
I think it's like, you can't have a company named Apple that sells apples, because then the name of the company would be the same as the name of the thing they're selling, and you can't sell consumer electronics because there's already Apple Computer selling computers, MP3 players, and phones. But you could probably sell something like paint, or squid, or bracelets. Funny you should mention that. Apple records lost to Apple computer! Apple records came first (Beatles label). Apple computer initially claimed they would never get into the music business. So Apple records let Apple computer use the name Apple. But guess what? Along comes iTunes, and Apple computer enters the music business.
|
|
|
Post by outspaced on Jul 8, 2009 9:27:33 GMT
Yes, I think so. Another reason why the dislike Apple-philes have of "Micro$osft" for being overbearing control Fascists escapes me. (Personally, I think both are crap.) Uh...go Linux? When someone writes a decent version of Linux that is straightforward to use and doesn't require me to open the flipping TERMINAL every time I want to do something, I will seriously consider it. (I consider being able to natively read/write NTFS-formatted disks to be required; currently, the Linux installations I've tried can be configured to read them--with much pain, and much TERMINAL use--but cannot write to them, which is a showstopper for me.)
|
|
|
Post by Taryn on Jul 9, 2009 1:23:56 GMT
Yeah, that's my #1 problem with Linux. It's like using a Tandy 1000 or something. Yes, I've used DOS and Kernal and know some programming. No, that doesn't mean I want to use the command line all the time or dive into other people's poorly-written and poorly-commented code to use my computer and tailor every program to my specific setup. And whenever a "people's Linux" comes out, the geeks scorn it because apparently they think nobody should be anywhere near a computer if they haven't memorized every command in vi, or some other hopelessly outdated program that Linux geeks tend to cling to. Using most Linuxes, even with GUIs, is often like being in 1972.
|
|
|
Post by outspaced on Jul 9, 2009 9:03:32 GMT
Amen! You're preachin' to the choir, sister! Testify! Nice to know it's not just me being thick. In the 90s, I used the Shell in AmigaDOS quite a lot, but the one of the fundamental ideas of improvement in OSes is surely to increase the ease of use for the end user; that would definitely include removing the need to drop down to a CLI every time I want to do something with my own computer. Refusing to develop in that direction is living in the past far more than Microsoft.
|
|
|
Post by Thomas Wolmer on Jul 9, 2009 12:28:59 GMT
The last part of this thread is soon due for deletion due to its immense offtopicness... but in the meantime:
I installed Ubuntu on a machine a while ago, just to check it out. I don't remember having to run shells or edit .rc files much. In fact, not at all. It also updates itself nicely when I turn it on, etc.
I also don't hear linux enthusiasts slag it much.
Is there really a problem?
/ Thomas, now going back to work in one of his 18 open terminals or 3 emacses etc etc on his *real* linux machine... :-)
|
|
|
Post by Ghuntar on Jul 9, 2009 16:06:51 GMT
Huhu, Taryn and outspaced are exagerating... Using the Ubuntu distibution is realy simple, and NTFS is fully supported. It's a Linux n00b that is saying this , You can trust me ! Ghuntar.
|
|
|
Post by outspaced on Jul 10, 2009 9:36:46 GMT
See Comment 1. There's a guy who knows the pain of trying to use Linux! :-p Hey, Thomas! Did you look at the 22tbos issue regarding the potential discrepancy in the Grey Star time-line? Since you're the time-line man, we're waiting on your input! (See, I can be on-topic when I want to. Uh, actually...)
|
|
|
Post by Thomas Wolmer on Jul 10, 2009 11:02:23 GMT
We don't know exactly what that guy did or tried to do. I suspect that he did not do things the way they were supposed to be done. I can screw up other systems as well by not doing things the way they should be done...
Message posted to the mailing list!
|
|
|
Post by outspaced on Jul 10, 2009 14:20:17 GMT
Yeah, I spotted that--cheers! One more thing completed from the extensive Book 22 agenda . . .
|
|