This talk of 9/11 and deaths really couldn't have come at a worse time. I'm flying to America tomorrow, and although after RTFA I should feel better about plane travel, it really is the last thing I need. If not simply for the reminder of the potential for horrible fiery death that comes with air travel (no matter how unlikely) then also for the fact that barely 24 hours before I'm due to fly the NSA will link my internet usage to a discussion about 9/11 and also Wikipedia pages about the Lockerbie disaster and plane hijackings. If I'm not back posting in three weeks someone send help c/o Guantanamo Bay.
The main reason everyone remembers the date of 9/11 is because it's known as '9/11'. Most often disasters are remembered by the place they hit and/or, in the case of plane crashes, the flight number (eg. Lockerbie/Pan Am 103). Obviously 'New York' is synonymous with so much that it wasn't going to be remembered simply by that and since there were multiple flights involved that wasn't going to be it either.
If the planes had hit Bumblefuck, Ohio and the thing had been referred to as the Bumblefuck Disaster for the last 5 years I bet most people wouldn't remember the exact date of it, 3000 dead or otherwise.
I think that's absolutely correct. Also, by using a system that's already in use on another well-known site if someone complains about the unfairness of the system you can always play the "well someothersite.com uses it for their x million customers without much trouble" card.
The only thing you might have to watch out for is that you implement it and then 5 years down the line someothersite.com sues you for infringing on their IP of "a system by which to resolve user conflicts by means of <your conflict resolution method here>". That might seem ridiculous but then what isn't about IP laws these days?
Because it's a horrible waste of energy? Because of the whole 'global warming thing'? Sorry but SETI@home and torrents are not a valid reason to keep your computer running all the time and I think it's nothing short of grossly irresponsible of people like you who run your system 24/7/365 when it is completely unnecessary.
I don't care if you're folding proteins to cure cancer, searching for aliens, sticking a finger up at the RIAA or just keeping it running to tell all your friends about your big swinging dick uptime - it's all a waste. Programs like those should be used to make use of spare processing power - when your computer would otherwise be on and doing nothing, those five-to-fifteen minute breaks where it'd be disruptive to turn it off but a shame to have it sitting there. By keeping your system running solely for those reasons you're doing a lot more harm than good. Switch it off.
Um, definitely not. When you can only run IE7 on Vista, XP or 2003, it won't be stemming the growth of Firefox at all. What a ridiculous question.
You say that like you've just listed three niche Operating Systems. Sorry to break this to you, but among the three OSes you've listed you've got the one currently installed on the vast majority of computers using the web, and another which in a few months time will come pre-installed on the vast majority of PCs sold worldwide. At what point is IE "only" being able to run on these systems going to be a problem in challenging Firefox's future growth?
I'm not saying IE 7 is better or even as good as FF. I haven't used IE7 at all yet. But that's not the point. The main draw of FF to the 'non-geek' was it's tabbed browsing, popup blocking, increased security, and search boxes. Now all of those things are available within IE. Again, I'm not saying IE is better at any of those things than FF, I'm simply saying they exist and that to the casual observer FF and IE are equal in the features that matter most to most people. And when the average user sees that fact, they're probably not going to take the time to see which is truly better, they're going to see that they have 'the same features' that matter to them and then they'll pick the one that's more easily available to them. In case you're not clear, that'd be Internet Explorer.
I know that's not what you want to hear. It's not what I want to hear either. But that doesn't change what seems to me to be a fairly logical assumption: Yes, IE7 is going to pose serious problems for Firefox's growth in the coming months and years unless FF does something truly great to put it a clear step up from IE again. And I'm sorry to say that FF2.0 doesn't fit the bill.
Is taking tabs and applying them to web browsing all that innovative anyway? Surely the first program to interface a tabbed interface or equivalent (ie. switchbar), whatever it's purpose, is the true innovator and the first web browser to make use of them was simply "a good idea".
Tabbed web browsing in itself doesn't seem to be a milestone of great significance. Certainly no more so than tabbed text editing or tabbed image viewing etc.
Just to clarify, PC World and Currys are NOT major games retailers, Currys is an electrical goods store and PC World is primarily for PC hardware. This isn't much of a blow to Rockstar at all.
All jokes aside, who the hell owns a pick-axe nowadays? It's not like this guy just came from working "down t'mines". Of course you can't control the sale of pick-axes of their handles, but it would be nice if there was a little checkbox to fill in when buying one.
Purpose of purchase
__ Business __ Bludgeoning
You know, just a heads up to everyone in a 70 mile radius of the fucking lunatic in their vicinity.
Actually I'm British and I've seen plenty of interest for both the Wii and the PS3 here in the UK.
As far as Japanese game makers go, they'll make games for whatever sells, wherever it sells. Don't be so close-minded and don't put so much faith in the findings of one survey. The ability for the companies to make a succesful roll-out of their product, the machines' capabilities, and oh yes, the quality of games available will be what determine the success or failure of both consoles.
Are you kidding? A survey of 4000 people in Tokyo is your basis for Nintendo losing the Next-Gen war? For one thing, what sells in Japan is by no means guaranteed to be what sells in the U.S., Europe, or anywhere else. More importantly it's a small survey where two of the three options aren't even available yet. It means absolutely nothing.
The film isn't going to be about his life. It's about the scientific theories that he and many others have come up with. I didn't see the BBC series but I'm pretty sure it was primarily a biopic of Hawking, which is nothing like the film described in the article.
OK so 80% is a giant share of the market, but 20% of the market is also far too much to ignore and that means websites are gonna have to cater for the non-IE browser. That means conforming to web standards which means anyone with the skills and desire can write a standards conforming browser and fight for their share of the market on even ground with IE, Firefox, and the rest.
IE may still be the dominant browser but the days of "this browser requires Internet Explorer" are long gone. And thank God for that.
A lot of people have issues with Firefox's resource use being too high. What's IE7's like? With all the new stuff MS have added to catch up with Firefox, isn't there a possibility that IE has also lost some of it's advantage in this area? Anyone have any figures from beta testing IE7?
Slashdot Mirror
This talk of 9/11 and deaths really couldn't have come at a worse time. I'm flying to America tomorrow, and although after RTFA I should feel better about plane travel, it really is the last thing I need. If not simply for the reminder of the potential for horrible fiery death that comes with air travel (no matter how unlikely) then also for the fact that barely 24 hours before I'm due to fly the NSA will link my internet usage to a discussion about 9/11 and also Wikipedia pages about the Lockerbie disaster and plane hijackings. If I'm not back posting in three weeks someone send help c/o Guantanamo Bay.
The main reason everyone remembers the date of 9/11 is because it's known as '9/11'. Most often disasters are remembered by the place they hit and/or, in the case of plane crashes, the flight number (eg. Lockerbie/Pan Am 103). Obviously 'New York' is synonymous with so much that it wasn't going to be remembered simply by that and since there were multiple flights involved that wasn't going to be it either.
If the planes had hit Bumblefuck, Ohio and the thing had been referred to as the Bumblefuck Disaster for the last 5 years I bet most people wouldn't remember the exact date of it, 3000 dead or otherwise.
I think that's absolutely correct. Also, by using a system that's already in use on another well-known site if someone complains about the unfairness of the system you can always play the "well someothersite.com uses it for their x million customers without much trouble" card.
The only thing you might have to watch out for is that you implement it and then 5 years down the line someothersite.com sues you for infringing on their IP of "a system by which to resolve user conflicts by means of <your conflict resolution method here>". That might seem ridiculous but then what isn't about IP laws these days?
What is the point in shuting your machine down?
Because it's a horrible waste of energy? Because of the whole 'global warming thing'? Sorry but SETI@home and torrents are not a valid reason to keep your computer running all the time and I think it's nothing short of grossly irresponsible of people like you who run your system 24/7/365 when it is completely unnecessary.
I don't care if you're folding proteins to cure cancer, searching for aliens, sticking a finger up at the RIAA or just keeping it running to tell all your friends about your big swinging dick uptime - it's all a waste. Programs like those should be used to make use of spare processing power - when your computer would otherwise be on and doing nothing, those five-to-fifteen minute breaks where it'd be disruptive to turn it off but a shame to have it sitting there. By keeping your system running solely for those reasons you're doing a lot more harm than good. Switch it off.
Um, definitely not. When you can only run IE7 on Vista, XP or 2003, it won't be stemming the growth of Firefox at all. What a ridiculous question.
You say that like you've just listed three niche Operating Systems. Sorry to break this to you, but among the three OSes you've listed you've got the one currently installed on the vast majority of computers using the web, and another which in a few months time will come pre-installed on the vast majority of PCs sold worldwide. At what point is IE "only" being able to run on these systems going to be a problem in challenging Firefox's future growth?
I'm not saying IE 7 is better or even as good as FF. I haven't used IE7 at all yet. But that's not the point. The main draw of FF to the 'non-geek' was it's tabbed browsing, popup blocking, increased security, and search boxes. Now all of those things are available within IE. Again, I'm not saying IE is better at any of those things than FF, I'm simply saying they exist and that to the casual observer FF and IE are equal in the features that matter most to most people. And when the average user sees that fact, they're probably not going to take the time to see which is truly better, they're going to see that they have 'the same features' that matter to them and then they'll pick the one that's more easily available to them. In case you're not clear, that'd be Internet Explorer.
I know that's not what you want to hear. It's not what I want to hear either. But that doesn't change what seems to me to be a fairly logical assumption: Yes, IE7 is going to pose serious problems for Firefox's growth in the coming months and years unless FF does something truly great to put it a clear step up from IE again. And I'm sorry to say that FF2.0 doesn't fit the bill.
Is taking tabs and applying them to web browsing all that innovative anyway? Surely the first program to interface a tabbed interface or equivalent (ie. switchbar), whatever it's purpose, is the true innovator and the first web browser to make use of them was simply "a good idea".
Tabbed web browsing in itself doesn't seem to be a milestone of great significance. Certainly no more so than tabbed text editing or tabbed image viewing etc.
Yes it's BS, but Mozilla didn't write the article so you can hardly blame them for it.
Just to clarify, PC World and Currys are NOT major games retailers, Currys is an electrical goods store and PC World is primarily for PC hardware. This isn't much of a blow to Rockstar at all.
No way man! Spades beat pick-axes hands down!
Name and address please.
All jokes aside, who the hell owns a pick-axe nowadays? It's not like this guy just came from working "down t'mines". Of course you can't control the sale of pick-axes of their handles, but it would be nice if there was a little checkbox to fill in when buying one.
Purpose of purchase
__ Business
__ Bludgeoning
You know, just a heads up to everyone in a 70 mile radius of the fucking lunatic in their vicinity.
Actually I'm British and I've seen plenty of interest for both the Wii and the PS3 here in the UK. As far as Japanese game makers go, they'll make games for whatever sells, wherever it sells. Don't be so close-minded and don't put so much faith in the findings of one survey. The ability for the companies to make a succesful roll-out of their product, the machines' capabilities, and oh yes, the quality of games available will be what determine the success or failure of both consoles.
Are you kidding? A survey of 4000 people in Tokyo is your basis for Nintendo losing the Next-Gen war? For one thing, what sells in Japan is by no means guaranteed to be what sells in the U.S., Europe, or anywhere else. More importantly it's a small survey where two of the three options aren't even available yet. It means absolutely nothing.
I question the legitimacy of these 'facts'. Stephen Hawking doesn't have a beard.
The film isn't going to be about his life. It's about the scientific theories that he and many others have come up with. I didn't see the BBC series but I'm pretty sure it was primarily a biopic of Hawking, which is nothing like the film described in the article.
OK so 80% is a giant share of the market, but 20% of the market is also far too much to ignore and that means websites are gonna have to cater for the non-IE browser. That means conforming to web standards which means anyone with the skills and desire can write a standards conforming browser and fight for their share of the market on even ground with IE, Firefox, and the rest.
IE may still be the dominant browser but the days of "this browser requires Internet Explorer" are long gone. And thank God for that.
A lot of people have issues with Firefox's resource use being too high. What's IE7's like? With all the new stuff MS have added to catch up with Firefox, isn't there a possibility that IE has also lost some of it's advantage in this area? Anyone have any figures from beta testing IE7?