Ah... good ol' RCs. Whenever I see a Release Candidate version of software, I always remember the rabid Slashdot comments raking Microsoft over the coals for having the audacity to give us Vista RC2 and how poor they were for having to release a SECOND Release Candidate. They whine about how the RC1 had bugs that needed to be fixed... Boo-hoo. "A release candidate should be a candidate for release, not a beta, waah!" I made a post about it a while ago, back before I bothered to include links to the articles I was referring to, but it didn't take long searching Slashdot to find what I was referring to. Be sure to read the comments, of course. What brought that post on back then? Well, it was the fact that, on one side, Slashdot readers were blasting Microsoft about RC2 being the result of their inept programming, where, the very same day, October 9th, 2006, there was not a single similar comment to describe Firefox 2 RC2, even though, according to Slashdot's own logic and reasoning, Firefox should have been equally "inept" at coding when they released an RC that wasn't quite ready for release.

So what brought this post on NOW? Firefox THREE is Release Candidate 2 now, and, like I said, any time I see a piece of software hitting RC2, I remember all the morons who thought Microsoft should be the exception. I suppose it should be viewed as a compliment and that they really do think Microsoft is competent enough to get software right on the first go. Personally, I never did have a problem with RC1, and maybe you didn't either, but! Maybe you did... See, that's the wonderful world of computers for you. When you build something in a controlled environment and then release it to the public, the plethora of different configurations of PCs will literally compromise all stability you've planned on. Coding for PCs is hard work, unlike Apples that all come off the same expensive assembly-line with the same manufacture of parts. (But I abstain.)

Point is, Microsoft was somehow inept because they had to release Vista RC2, but the RC2 of Firefox was allowed without a hitch. I realize this really isn't as important as pointing this kind of stuff out in politics, but hypocrisy is hypocrisy, and I like to have documented instances of such things when I point out why the open-source community is comprised mostly of arrogant crap-heads who give themselves one set of rules and everyone else another. (Case in point: Open-source CAN have RC2. Closed-source can NOT have RC2.) Although I have to honest... There is ONE comment on the Firefox 3 RC2 article that complains about how there are bugs that Mozilla hasn't bothered to fix for YEARS. We all know that comment is absolutely correct (if you don't believe it, look as the link the comment provides). I'll put my money on someone driving by and leaving the typical "it's open-source, so fix it if you think it should be". Well, I'm sorry, but it doesn't necessarily take a programming genius to find a bug, now, does it? I, personally, can't program modern languages worth squat, but I am quite adept at discovering bugs (and exploits in games that I have been known for taking advantage of). I can't fix it, but I can show someone so THEY can fix it.

Anyway, there you are!

I'm attempting to do some SQL database housecleaning! As a result, images should magically appear where once there was none (on old posts, especially)... Another side-effect is that comments on all posts have been opened, even on ones I've specifically closed for a reason. If, by chance, you happen to comment on a post that I have purposely closed, whether you do by accident or because you wanted the last word in, don't worry. The subjects are cold and I, at least, have no emotion attached to them. (The same can't be said for anyone else, of course.)

In short: Commenting is allowed on all posts for the time being.

Ah, I really don't miss Slashdot or Digg... The comments there are so blindly anti-Microsoft that they can't tell a good product from a bad product anymore. They just lump everything Microsoft does into the "stupid" folder without bothering to be objective. With the moderation systems they have, they only encourage the baseless slander. Ah, good ol' "age of the blog". No accountability... Just spill what you think without doing any research and watch the flood of people pat you on the back. (Unless, of course, you share non-mainstream views.) But, I have RSS feeds from a couple Slashdot categories (nothing I haven't heard before it hits Slashdot, thanks to Google Reader), but sometimes I get to see hilariously short-sighted insinuations such as this:

"Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer have shown a small snippet of the upcoming Windows 7 at Walt Mossberg's D: All Things Digital conference. It seems like the Windows team have switched their focus for inspiration from Mac OS X to the iPhone OS. Multitouch is the biggest addition, and will appear system-wide, usable anywhere. The most interesting part of the touch UI is not the eye candy, it's the Task Bar, which seems to have morphed into a pie menu."

Right. Microsoft needs to take inspiration from the iPhone because they never experimented with multi-touch on their own since 2001 with the Microsoft Surface. (That link is a PDF, just to warn you.) Nah... Of course not. We all know Microsoft can't research and develop things on their own. We all know that all the ideas they have are copied directly from Apple, and that Apple is completely innocent and minds their own business. (Boy, is that a laugh.)

Also notice the incorrect grammar. "...the Windows team have..." What the heck is that, anyway? I've heard no compelling excuses as to why people do this. You use "have" instead of "has" when the subject is plural. "The teams have switched..." "The team has switched..." It's one team. "Sony have decided to..." No! "Sony HAS decided to..." Sony is a single entity. "Microsoft have let Bungie go..." No! "Microsoft HAS let Bungie go..." When you want to be lazy and abbreviate it, you say "Sony's done that," not "Sony've done that." "Nintendo HAS the best console." Not "Nintendo have the best console." It might be a group of people inside the team or company, but they're still just ONE team... ONE company. If you wanted to talk about the people at the company, you'd say "the employees at Nintendo have", not "Nintendo have". Nintendo is a singular entity that HAS things. But I'm really not surprised at this. After all, this is the Internet we're talking about. (Not "these are the Internet"... Kind of like "these are the voyages"?)

But anyway. There you are. More less-than-truthful Apple fanaticism.

If you haven't seen the finale for this season of LOST, this is your warning that this post includes MAJOR spoilers.

(more...)

You know, for all the "objective reporting" that the mainstream media is supposed to do, there sure is an awful lot of articles speculating on when Clinton might quit running and a lot of articles that are more or less open questions asking her when she will. It seems like they think Obama is going to win before the race is even over, doesn't it? I think the media has done this once before... Touting victory before it's really over? Now when could that have been?

Oh, yes. Now I remember. The 2000 U.S. Presidential Election!

I'm not even a Democrat and I still think the media should be REPORTING instead of PROJECTING.

Anyone who says the media isn't biased is lying to themselves.