Nope; the two sets (upper and lower ship) were both contiguous sets since the TV series. I don't think there are shots even close to the movie's opening in the TV show (given the nature of TV and when commercials need come in), but the two ship sets were always contiguous, complete with roofs, practical lighting, etc. It's one of the more impressive sets in TV history.
Joss Whedon's Serenity features a nearly ten-minute long scene with no visible cuts (there is technically a seamless dissolve half-way through for technical reasons -- watch the DVD commentary and you'll see what I mean). Whedon didn't do it to show off or grab attention, but actually to make the audience feel safe and trusting after the rapid cuts and scene/flow changes found at the very beginning of the film.
I find rapid cuts annoying and a way to draw the viewer away from a lack of detail or a scene that can't carry itself on the acting/sets/dialog/action alone. I don't seek out long takes though -- like most things in movies: if they're done really well you shouldn't be thinking about them, but rather about the plot.
Actually, it totally costs taxpayers a tonne more money if the injuries sustained after an accident are worse because of a lack of protective equipment (provided you have socialized medicine, which both Canada and the UK do -- they also both have these type of exception laws in place). I drive a motorcycle and have been in accidents; helmets have kept me from needing anymore than a few weeks rest and a single trip to the ER.
I actually started using Macs right around the time Coda came out, and used it for years 'til I switched to TextMate. Part of my switch was because my coding was becoming much more varied and I wanted more of TextMate's tricks/extensibility.
I still use and quite like Coda. But TextMate is my main weapon now-a-days.
Complex learning-curve, they're usually ugly-as-hell, slow and bloated, a lot are Java-based (so they feel less OS-native), and I can accomplish most of my tasks in a terminal window or TextMate commands. Plus the actual text editors in most IDEs feel second-rate, if not like afterthoughts. I spend a lot of time looking at/writing code/tests/etc. as a programmer, so a good text editor makes me happy.
I very rarely use XCode, and only use it when developing Mac/iPhone stuff. Largely because of Interface Builder, all that sort of stuff -- using XCode makes sense then. But I write big projects in OO PHP, Ruby, etc., and use TextMate projects for all of it.
I should have said that while I do use XCode, I don't spend most of my time in it even when I do, and don't think I take too much advantage of its IDE-ness. Maybe I just suck at using IDEs?
Aside from using XCode, I pretty much never use IDEs, especially for web development. I just use TextMate for anything not in XCode (and I even edit a lot of C/C++/Obj-C in XCode nowadays, and other apps for performance, testing, etc. (or write TextMate commands to run external commands).
A few developers (i.e. the 5-person team I'm on) in my organization (government) have superuser privileges on their own machines (Macs) and a few of us can sudo on our local Xserve (which is totally internal and run by us/our local Mac sysadmin, not the "corporate" IT folks) to do things like read log files, update MacPorts, etc. We don't have superuser privileges on any of the production servers (though we should have a bit more flexibility than we have on said servers, which could be setup through sudo without allowing us the ability to change software on the machine, etc.).
You write a piece of software, and you license it. Making something GPL might be a pain for other users who aren't interested in that license, but them's the ropes, right? It's not like GPLing your software will lead to its demise (see: Linux, WordPress, etc.).
As cool as Amazon can be, this was a lame move by them from many perspectives, and I hope this guy wins the case. Perhaps it could set a precedent against deleting data from users' devices in general.
Actually, they're talking about multiple processes, not multithreading. Threads all belong to a single process, which, if it crashes, will bring down all of its threads. Running the shell in one process, then each tab/window in its own process means that, much like Chrome, a single page can't bring down the myriad of tabs/windows you might have open, if you browse the web like I do.
I thought the magic of Google is that it's not (as) personalized, and I can get information outside my group of friends/peers. Frankly, my friends are great, but I don't go to them for advice on, say, programming; I go to Google. What's more, I couldn't get a lot of the info I get from search engines from my friends, because they just don't know. Social networking is awesome, but using Facebook in place of Google sounds like many steps back, at least the way it's being presented here.
The dock is the quick launch bar and the taskbar combined into one, basically; you have all of your running apps in the dock, but you can also put the icons of apps you want quick access to there.
Really though, there's not a lot of difference, and this is a pretty stupid patent.
For what it's worth, I have a 16GB White 3G iPhone that I bought about a week after launch, and have had no call issues (call quality is actually reported by people I talk to as being "amazing"), no GPS issues, etc.
The first weekend I had it I lost internet and had to restart it, and since then have had no issues with big things like GPS/3G/etc. I updated to 2.0.2 last night and used the GPS in town and it was actually super-fast and stable.
That said, the contact/SMS slowdown business, and somewhat crash-happiness it exhibits haven't gone away, although seem somewhat better. 3rd-party apps, especially games (I'm looking at you: Super Monkey Crash-a-million-times Ball) seem really rushed and quick to fail.
While CA-validated certs are still somewhat stupid (my site is just as encrypted self-signed or not, though I see the points on the site of having CAs), namecheap.com does offer somewhat cheap SSL certs -- I've used them and it's been OK for simple stuff like adding a cert to my mail.* mailservers and such.
I don't even know where web designers came up with this idea that it's OK to spend extra time tweaking it for users of a bizarrely non-compliant browser.
For the longest time, there wasn't a reasonable spec to measure against, and even when there was, no browser supported it. Both Netscape and IE were non-compliant browsers, and the notion of designing for them was that everyone could see your content. IE is a huge part of the market and can't be ignored; in much the same way we design for people who are forced to use text browsers or screen-readers, we design for people using IE, because we want our content to be viewable by everyone.
Does IE suck? You bet. Do I hate having to design for it? Sure. Do I think its users deserve to be punished when they often don't even know what a "browser" is? No. Either get a little "Best viewed in Netscape Navigator 4" button for your site or understand that if you want people to get your content, you have to design for IE.
MacOS X on PCs is like Linux on microwaves: it's very cool, and a neat experiment, but I think for most folks, it's not very appealing.
I'm sure the crowd of people who feel the need to upgrade their computer every 5 seconds but like MacOS X otherwise might dig this. I can see this turning/degenerating into a "why doesn't Apple just license MacOS X for PCs?!" discussion awful quick. But just because it's possible doesn't mean it's a good idea.
Slashdot Mirror
Nope; the two sets (upper and lower ship) were both contiguous sets since the TV series. I don't think there are shots even close to the movie's opening in the TV show (given the nature of TV and when commercials need come in), but the two ship sets were always contiguous, complete with roofs, practical lighting, etc. It's one of the more impressive sets in TV history.
Joss Whedon's Serenity features a nearly ten-minute long scene with no visible cuts (there is technically a seamless dissolve half-way through for technical reasons -- watch the DVD commentary and you'll see what I mean). Whedon didn't do it to show off or grab attention, but actually to make the audience feel safe and trusting after the rapid cuts and scene/flow changes found at the very beginning of the film.
I find rapid cuts annoying and a way to draw the viewer away from a lack of detail or a scene that can't carry itself on the acting/sets/dialog/action alone. I don't seek out long takes though -- like most things in movies: if they're done really well you shouldn't be thinking about them, but rather about the plot.
Actually, it totally costs taxpayers a tonne more money if the injuries sustained after an accident are worse because of a lack of protective equipment (provided you have socialized medicine, which both Canada and the UK do -- they also both have these type of exception laws in place). I drive a motorcycle and have been in accidents; helmets have kept me from needing anymore than a few weeks rest and a single trip to the ER.
Having billions of dollars in chequing strikes me as incredibly insane.
I actually started using Macs right around the time Coda came out, and used it for years 'til I switched to TextMate. Part of my switch was because my coding was becoming much more varied and I wanted more of TextMate's tricks/extensibility.
I still use and quite like Coda. But TextMate is my main weapon now-a-days.
Complex learning-curve, they're usually ugly-as-hell, slow and bloated, a lot are Java-based (so they feel less OS-native), and I can accomplish most of my tasks in a terminal window or TextMate commands. Plus the actual text editors in most IDEs feel second-rate, if not like afterthoughts. I spend a lot of time looking at/writing code/tests/etc. as a programmer, so a good text editor makes me happy.
I very rarely use XCode, and only use it when developing Mac/iPhone stuff. Largely because of Interface Builder, all that sort of stuff -- using XCode makes sense then. But I write big projects in OO PHP, Ruby, etc., and use TextMate projects for all of it.
I should have said that while I do use XCode, I don't spend most of my time in it even when I do, and don't think I take too much advantage of its IDE-ness. Maybe I just suck at using IDEs?
Aside from using XCode, I pretty much never use IDEs, especially for web development. I just use TextMate for anything not in XCode (and I even edit a lot of C/C++/Obj-C in XCode nowadays, and other apps for performance, testing, etc. (or write TextMate commands to run external commands).
Would moving the servers, or serving certain countries from another one (Canada? Europe?) help at all? This is obviously incredibly shitty.
A few developers (i.e. the 5-person team I'm on) in my organization (government) have superuser privileges on their own machines (Macs) and a few of us can sudo on our local Xserve (which is totally internal and run by us/our local Mac sysadmin, not the "corporate" IT folks) to do things like read log files, update MacPorts, etc. We don't have superuser privileges on any of the production servers (though we should have a bit more flexibility than we have on said servers, which could be setup through sudo without allowing us the ability to change software on the machine, etc.).
You write a piece of software, and you license it. Making something GPL might be a pain for other users who aren't interested in that license, but them's the ropes, right? It's not like GPLing your software will lead to its demise (see: Linux, WordPress, etc.).
Oh @Maria! I #love you more than you will ever know! Together we shall live, watching kings come and go! (cont'd at http://twitlonger.com/)
As cool as Amazon can be, this was a lame move by them from many perspectives, and I hope this guy wins the case. Perhaps it could set a precedent against deleting data from users' devices in general.
Actually, they're talking about multiple processes, not multithreading. Threads all belong to a single process, which, if it crashes, will bring down all of its threads. Running the shell in one process, then each tab/window in its own process means that, much like Chrome, a single page can't bring down the myriad of tabs/windows you might have open, if you browse the web like I do.
I thought the magic of Google is that it's not (as) personalized, and I can get information outside my group of friends/peers. Frankly, my friends are great, but I don't go to them for advice on, say, programming; I go to Google. What's more, I couldn't get a lot of the info I get from search engines from my friends, because they just don't know. Social networking is awesome, but using Facebook in place of Google sounds like many steps back, at least the way it's being presented here.
Basecamp has been the only thing ever that made me not hate doing PM. http://basecamphq.com/
Matthew Riley MacPherson never posts using his real name.
No HD, no wireless, no shaver. Lame.
This is where's it's at.
The dock is the quick launch bar and the taskbar combined into one, basically; you have all of your running apps in the dock, but you can also put the icons of apps you want quick access to there.
Really though, there's not a lot of difference, and this is a pretty stupid patent.
For what it's worth, I have a 16GB White 3G iPhone that I bought about a week after launch, and have had no call issues (call quality is actually reported by people I talk to as being "amazing"), no GPS issues, etc.
The first weekend I had it I lost internet and had to restart it, and since then have had no issues with big things like GPS/3G/etc. I updated to 2.0.2 last night and used the GPS in town and it was actually super-fast and stable.
That said, the contact/SMS slowdown business, and somewhat crash-happiness it exhibits haven't gone away, although seem somewhat better. 3rd-party apps, especially games (I'm looking at you: Super Monkey Crash-a-million-times Ball) seem really rushed and quick to fail.
If you want to let EA, or any big company, that you disagree with their draconian DRM, please email /dev/null@ea.com.
Yeah, there's also nationalized healthcare and less backwater religious nuts. Things are better in Europe, Japan, and even Canada.
While CA-validated certs are still somewhat stupid (my site is just as encrypted self-signed or not, though I see the points on the site of having CAs), namecheap.com does offer somewhat cheap SSL certs -- I've used them and it's been OK for simple stuff like adding a cert to my mail.* mailservers and such.
I don't even know where web designers came up with this idea that it's OK to spend extra time tweaking it for users of a bizarrely non-compliant browser.
For the longest time, there wasn't a reasonable spec to measure against, and even when there was, no browser supported it. Both Netscape and IE were non-compliant browsers, and the notion of designing for them was that everyone could see your content. IE is a huge part of the market and can't be ignored; in much the same way we design for people who are forced to use text browsers or screen-readers, we design for people using IE, because we want our content to be viewable by everyone.
Does IE suck? You bet. Do I hate having to design for it? Sure. Do I think its users deserve to be punished when they often don't even know what a "browser" is? No. Either get a little "Best viewed in Netscape Navigator 4" button for your site or understand that if you want people to get your content, you have to design for IE.
MacOS X on PCs is like Linux on microwaves: it's very cool, and a neat experiment, but I think for most folks, it's not very appealing.
I'm sure the crowd of people who feel the need to upgrade their computer every 5 seconds but like MacOS X otherwise might dig this. I can see this turning/degenerating into a "why doesn't Apple just license MacOS X for PCs?!" discussion awful quick. But just because it's possible doesn't mean it's a good idea.