I wish the article had a bit more meat to it. Not that this is a sin but he's just parroting things said in about 1000 other places by 1000 other people. Pen and paper good. Check. Daily journal. Check.
I think the author has jumped to a foregone conclusion. He thinks it's all about getting releases before they're made public, and doesn't see any reasons other than that people might have for going with pirated entertainment.
The reasons are many and varied. Some folks simply don't want to pay, others are frustrated by the content providers insistence on their way or the highway.
This has always been Dave's problem. He's a Big Idea Guy, but his implementations often end up being somewhat less than fully thought through. I say this as someone who has been following him for way more years than I like to think about (I wrote a bunch of Frontier code WAAAY back in the Classic MacOS days :) As always though, he's thought provoking and gets other people discussing better ways to do it, which I think he entirely approves of.
Wow, the author of this article should be the poster child for wh Google's 2 factor should be de rigeur for anyone who actually cares about the contents of their email.
I disagree with the author on a number of levels. First and foremost, he/she's treating the editor as if its sole purpose in life is the invention of new code. This seems like a somewhat stilted view of reality to me. Features like syntax highlighting, syntax aware block indentation, and project aware search are easy wins in terms of ROI.
Also, they bemoan the fact that for many people their editor is also their primary code reading environment, but it sounds very much to me like what they're asking for is amply provided for in a modern IDE.
While I agree that fixating on a particular tool can be a waste beyond a certain point, IMO a programmer investing in learning their editor seems like time well spent to me.
100% agreed. alttab is falling into the common geek social trap of assuming that all the world is exactly like him/her. Personally? I couldn't care less about start-ups. I'm happy that they exist, I appreciate the innovations they create, and I enjoy the fruits of their labors, but to act as if the alpha and omega of existence is solving the problem of what causes start-ups to fail is IMO fundamentally both arrogant and wrong headed, because start-ups represent only a small percentage of the tech world at large.
I like the article as I am also a command line junkie, but I have an issue with it. I might be being pedantic here, but the fundamental premise of the article is a falsehood.
UNIX is in no way, shape or form an IDE. IDE stands for Integrated Development Environment and means exactly that. All your tools under one roof.
I do not deny and in fact would also assert that the separate tool chain / everything is a stream of bytes philosophy can be used in amalgam as an incredibly powerful methodology for software development, but that doesn't make it an IDE.
The real issue here, as I see it, is that Apple needs to be 100% consistent about its app store approval process, and exceedingly clear when they yank an already approved app.
Why are they yanking it?
In a case like this, the reason seems pretty clear cut "Because you used an unauthorized AirPlay key" - but the way the current system works, Apple doesn't have to give a reason, they just pull the plug.
I am an unabashed Apple fan, but I think this aspect of the platform is broken and wrong and I wish they'd change their policies.
For a much less clear cut yanking incident, check out all the recent news on how they did this to iKamaSutra, which had no stolen copies of anything and got yanked for no reason at all, AND they refuse to work with the publisher to fix whatever violations may exist.
One fatal flaw with geeks is that we all think that the rest of the world thinks just like we do.
'tain't necessarily so. Most of the objections he raises in the article (e.g. Facebook making improper use of personal information) don't even register on the rank and file user's radar. Maybe they should, but they don't.
I don't think these results correlate at all to the popularity of a given programming language in use in the field.
For instance, pretty much ever since the language's ascendance to popularity, a visit to the bookstore will yield a veritable WALL of Java books, most of them bound for obsolescence within a year, or two, max. Sure, this happens with other programming languages too, but the constant churn of frameworks, libraries and infrastructure that happens in the Java world is a boon for book publishers.
I didn't draw the same conclusions that others seem to be drawing from this article. Having been in the tech industry for over 20 years now, I can tell you that a company's CEO having a firm grasp on the business side is nothing but win.
This doesn't mean that Apple will become Microsoft, or that all the technical innovation will end, it simply means that they are taking the steps they need to take to ensure that the techies will be ABLE to keep innovating.
But, don't let me get in the way of a good hand wringing session :)
I think you're missing Xion's point and taking the opportunity to complain about a pet peeve you have with the platform.
Personally, I couldn't agree more with what he's saying. Users of other platforms (like Android) have had the ability for apps to interoperate (with intents, for example) since the very beginning, and IOS is dramatically behind in this regard.
This is a nice little cheat sheet. I sometimes wonder if the profusion of cheat sheets for Git says something about its design, in particular the human interface aspects.
Few would deny that Git is one of the most powerful open source SCM systems to come around the bend in quite a while, but sometimes I think more attention should have been paid to making the 90% of tasks most developers need easy, rather than enabling the last 10% for the edge cases where it's required.
While I applaud the EUbuntu project's goals and think they're very worthy indeed, I also think they're deluding themselves if they are targeting the Apple iPad as competition.
I realize that's likely to be an unpopular view here, because hating on Apple is geekdom's new favorite past time, but to my mind it's fairly clear cut.
What's my point in all this? I think folks should focus on building great educational apps, and the platform will follow.