The part you quoted, yes, but not the part that kicked the whole thing off: he noticed someone's Facebook status update on his home screen widget. If he had to open an app to get Facebook updates, he wouldn't have seen it, because he had better things to do than browse Facebook.
Man, he has the Facebook app in his home screen... He sure hasn't better things to do.
If he had, he would had put his corporate email, stocks, news, whatelse.
The only that i would like to say is that Acid3 nuked really fast. At least the Acid2 ghosted the browser market for at least 2 years (correct me if i am wrong). Acid3 passed in a less that a month. It seems at last that the Acid3 wasn't so hard at all. Someone didn't do really good job (kidding).
Nice work with the dates.
Just to give one more hint, most of these specifications are in "Candidate Recommendation" state, and not yet in "Web Standard".
rtfm. The Acid3 test is a NEW test that uses/tests the NEW feature that the CSS3 intoduces. CSS3 intoduces many changes, that right now, non existent browser has implemented, so it is obviously that all current browser will fail. So, dont cry for your poor browser, firefox. Btw, for some reason, it seems that opera can handdle better the Acid3 test. The animation reach the 46/100, and the appearence looks really close to the reference (in comparison with firefox).
Same story as the Windows XP SP2. Many people were refusing to install it, since many other were complaining about problems that was supposed to create. Finally, all we will use it... or not
[flame] Actually i dont really care about Apple and its software, so i am not going to give the 5 minutes to read the article. (I dont even care about firefox, it just s**s) [/flame] My first post was actually to answer to its parent, that tries to give a excuse to Apple for hiding APIs.
This exactly what Microsoft tried to convinces us when the same issues raised in the Windows platform. But they didn't manage to convince anyone, and now they have to publish most of their API.
You are confusing two different concepts. You confuse the API that expose the kernel and the libraries of Apple, with the internal API, eg. of kernel, or Aqua.
The internal API is logical to be close and private, since it changes by version to version, and is the private property of Apple. After all, we don't need to know how and which data structures are exchanged into the kernel.
But when they build a library and give it to developers they can't have 'undocumented' functions or arguments. This is a try to limit thirds developers to bring software that compares with the bundled software of OS.
I still believe that he has taken the wrong way. He is risking to loose the most possible clients. You refuse microsoft's product again without evaluating them.-
About the standard compliace of the explorer, you forgot that it is a piece of software that his development cycle started when the standard about the web was still draft or on their early days. After all, it has to work around with all of the web developers who dont follow the standards and just want a browser to show their site as they think that should be shown. And even mozilla doesn't fully comlpies with the standards, and every believes the opposite doesn't know the basics. Why i dont here anyone yelling about the "non-standard" implemantion of the tcp-ip, or the sql language in the MSSQL, or the HTTP protocol on the IIS, or i dont know what else. You find the answer to my previous phrase...
ps. I believe that i havent to mention that i m software engineer too. That isn't change anything about my post.
And what in the hell do i care? A noone found a fund to found a start-up, and inform all of us that he is not going to use Microsoft product. What this has to do with me?
Seriously, it is an irresponsible decision to not use someone product just because you say that is a "devil" company. Have you evaluated and you rejected them? From the post it seems that not. After all, it still has the major part of the market that it seems you are involved.
I think that the article is prejudiced against the Microsoft Office. I really like to see a article out there, on a strong favorite Linux site, to comment that this commercial product from Microsoft is far better than our open source piece of crap. This is my personal opinion. As college student i had to use many times a office suite to write my papers. And by paper, i don't mean a 2 page document that has some simple bullshits. I mean 30+ pages papers with graphs, diagrams and most of all mathematical equations. Its not secret that OO tries to mimics a lot the Microsoft Office. This is not bad at all. By my opinion the Microsoft Office is by far the best. BUT at least they should try to do this better. I have all the times many problems when i use the OO. I use it mostly on Linux, but i do use it on Windows, too, to manipulate the documents i wrote on Linux. I m not gonna tell all the annoying things that the OO CANT do right and the Microsoft Office do with a few simple clicks. So, PLEASE WRITE a fair (and even a hard) critic for the OO to make them to do it better. As long as you forgive its disadvantages, and write how great it is (even it is not), you are not making good to that project. ps. btw: THE OO IT ISNT EVEN STABLE. WITH ANY VERSION I USE, ON ANY PLATFORM/DISTRIBUTION I USE IT, IT CRASH AT LEAST 1 TIME EVERY TIME I USE IT. this piece of crap cant even do a right copy/paste of a table form the Calc to the Writer and i am talking about ridiculous format and missing ROWS.
In greece, after the new (2006) law, you can put solar panels to your house and get paid from the electric company (the only one) for selling them electric power. You get paid 50 cents for every KWh you contribute to the network, since the selling price from the electric company is 7 cents per KWh.
This is possible cause to the new law that want to promote the use of clean energy.
Slashdot Mirror
https://games.slashdot.org/sto...
The part you quoted, yes, but not the part that kicked the whole thing off: he noticed someone's Facebook status update on his home screen widget. If he had to open an app to get Facebook updates, he wouldn't have seen it, because he had better things to do than browse Facebook.
Man, he has the Facebook app in his home screen... He sure hasn't better things to do.
If he had, he would had put his corporate email, stocks, news, whatelse.
The only that i would like to say is that Acid3 nuked really fast.
At least the Acid2 ghosted the browser market for at least 2 years (correct me if i am wrong).
Acid3 passed in a less that a month.
It seems at last that the Acid3 wasn't so hard at all. Someone didn't do really good job (kidding).
Nice work with the dates. Just to give one more hint, most of these specifications are in "Candidate Recommendation" state, and not yet in "Web Standard".
rtfm.
The Acid3 test is a NEW test that uses/tests the NEW feature that the CSS3 intoduces.
CSS3 intoduces many changes, that right now, non existent browser has implemented, so it is obviously that all current browser will fail. So, dont cry for your poor browser, firefox.
Btw, for some reason, it seems that opera can handdle better the Acid3 test. The animation reach the 46/100, and the appearence looks really close to the reference (in comparison with firefox).
Same story as the Windows XP SP2.
Many people were refusing to install it, since many other were complaining about problems that was supposed to create.
Finally, all we will use it... or not
[flame]
Actually i dont really care about Apple and its software, so i am not going to give the 5 minutes to read the article.
(I dont even care about firefox, it just s**s)
[/flame]
My first post was actually to answer to its parent, that tries to give a excuse to Apple for hiding APIs.
This exactly what Microsoft tried to convinces us when the same issues raised in the Windows platform. But they didn't manage to convince anyone, and now they have to publish most of their API. You are confusing two different concepts. You confuse the API that expose the kernel and the libraries of Apple, with the internal API, eg. of kernel, or Aqua. The internal API is logical to be close and private, since it changes by version to version, and is the private property of Apple. After all, we don't need to know how and which data structures are exchanged into the kernel. But when they build a library and give it to developers they can't have 'undocumented' functions or arguments. This is a try to limit thirds developers to bring software that compares with the bundled software of OS.
I still yelling my first phrase:
"And what in the hell do i care?"
I still believe that he has taken the wrong way. He is risking to loose the most possible clients.
You refuse microsoft's product again without evaluating them.-
About the standard compliace of the explorer, you forgot that it is a piece of software that his development cycle started when the standard about the web was still draft or on their early days. After all, it has to work around with all of the web developers who dont follow the standards and just want a browser to show their site as they think that should be shown.
And even mozilla doesn't fully comlpies with the standards, and every believes the opposite doesn't know the basics.
Why i dont here anyone yelling about the "non-standard" implemantion of the tcp-ip, or the sql language in the MSSQL, or the HTTP protocol on the IIS, or i dont know what else. You find the answer to my previous phrase...
ps. I believe that i havent to mention that i m software engineer too. That isn't change anything about my post.
And what in the hell do i care?
A noone found a fund to found a start-up, and inform all of us that he is not going to use Microsoft product.
What this has to do with me?
Seriously, it is an irresponsible decision to not use someone product just because you say that is a "devil" company. Have you evaluated and you rejected them? From the post it seems that not.
After all, it still has the major part of the market that it seems you are involved.
I think that the article is prejudiced against the Microsoft Office. I really like to see a article out there, on a strong favorite Linux site, to comment that this commercial product from Microsoft is far better than our open source piece of crap.
This is my personal opinion.
As college student i had to use many times a office suite to write my papers. And by paper, i don't mean a 2 page document that has some simple bullshits. I mean 30+ pages papers with graphs, diagrams and most of all mathematical equations.
Its not secret that OO tries to mimics a lot the Microsoft Office. This is not bad at all. By my opinion the Microsoft Office is by far the best. BUT at least they should try to do this better.
I have all the times many problems when i use the OO. I use it mostly on Linux, but i do use it on Windows, too, to manipulate the documents i wrote on Linux. I m not gonna tell all the annoying things that the OO CANT do right and the Microsoft Office do with a few simple clicks.
So, PLEASE WRITE a fair (and even a hard) critic for the OO to make them to do it better. As long as you forgive its disadvantages, and write how great it is (even it is not), you are not making good to that project.
ps. btw: THE OO IT ISNT EVEN STABLE. WITH ANY VERSION I USE, ON ANY PLATFORM/DISTRIBUTION I USE IT, IT CRASH AT LEAST 1 TIME EVERY TIME I USE IT. this piece of crap cant even do a right copy/paste of a table form the Calc to the Writer and i am talking about ridiculous format and missing ROWS.
In greece, after the new (2006) law, you can put solar panels to your house and get paid from the electric company (the only one) for selling them electric power. You get paid 50 cents for every KWh you contribute to the network, since the selling price from the electric company is 7 cents per KWh. This is possible cause to the new law that want to promote the use of clean energy.