I'm surprised no one so far mentioned Aptana Studio. It provides decent syntax highlighting, autocomplete, has support for a dozen popular libraries and a very good debugger that integrates Firebug with the Eclipse debugging framework. Plus, it has some neat features for web development such as the CSS autocomplete that indicates for which browsers each property is available.
That 1/2 second never bothered me, never got in the way and I move and open windows a lot. Does this mean you are wrong in feeling bothered by it? No. My point is simply: different people, different tastes, different impressions.
Furthermore, the animation time is completely configurable.
Mod parent up. Almost all attacks against eye candy are based on a false dicothomy between beauty and functionality. Wobbly windows are not useful? Well, probably neither is your wallpaper. Or the painting on your house. Or good-looking clothes. And as much as it may sound surprising, woobly windows do not get in my way, I like them and nowadays I feel unconfortable when I have to use another system that does not have them. Different people, different tastes.
Going all "eh, I prefer functionality" is like ignoring a incredibly hot girl because "since she's beautiful, she's probably dumb". One thing does not exclude the other, specially considering Compiz/KWin are remarkably fine-tunable.
I download Adobe Reader for Linux because some documents can only be seen like they were meant to be seen in it. But I avoid using the.tar.gz installer script: I usually download the.deb, unpack it manually instead of installing it and copy the folder to the/opt limbo. Then I use it only when I really really need it. I don't even bother in creating a link to the binary in/usr/local/bin or something. I keep it hard to use.
Why? Not because it's proprietary, not because I'm a FOSS zealot. Just because it's a bloated piece of crap that offers very little in exchange for a ridiculous loading time and a very intrusive installer that puts icons everywhere, creates dozens of new mimetype associations without saying it and copies its mozilla plugin to three different folders.
I can see why playing Halo (or, indeed, most games, with the notable exception of NetHack) might make you believe that. If only he had watched anime instead, he would have been taught the cruel reality of murder.
Unless, of course, he watched Dragon Ball. In this case, he would have been taught that the difference between living people and dead people is the presence of a halo over the head.
It's been a while since I worked with it and I don't have code examples with me at the moment, but think of it as the Matlab/Octave of statistics, including the preference for "function over each row/column" instead of loops.
Compared to other languages, R makes it easy to do statistical analysis tasks like Matlab/Octave makes it easy to do linear algebra tasks.
Plus, as other posts stated above, there's excellent documentation and tons of useful libraries (take a peek at the libraries available at the Debian repositories), Bioconductor being the finest example.
So far, I think none of Google's actions contradicted my personal opinion on their intentions with Chrome. I still believe their main objective is to force the use of web standards by evenly distributing the browser marketing between Gecko, WebKit and... whatever IE's engine is called. From this point of view, it makes sense that they are still funding Mozilla and chose an engine supported by default on Macs.
And no, they don't want standardization because of some altruistic ideals. It's just easier to develop web applications that way. And getting rid of the anomaly called IE6, which behaves differently from 7 and 8 to the point of being considered a different engine, is a very logical next step.
Any representation of a child in a sexual manner is considered child pornography in Australia. The wiki article you link to even mentions Australia (last I checked).
Mentions Australia and the Simpsons rule. Damn, wikipedians are fast. My bad.
...from Miller, explaining why he spent years refusing deals for filming Sin City, claming he was afraid that the director wouldn't be faithful to the comic book's spirit (pun not intended), and now is perfectly confortable in imposing his own view of The Spirit over Eisner's.
I'm not questioning here if the movie will be good or not. I'm just wondering if he ever tried to explain why he's not being completely hypocritical.
Seriously speaking, though, the popularity of flash games has also much to do with the fact that they're right there, easy to access. You receive an e-mail from a friend with a link to a new one, click it and can immediately start playing.
The current video-games now have online content and easy network access, but you still have to change medias and spend time and money. That makes a lot of difference.
Like said by previous posts, CodeWeavers is basically a company focused on Wine development. As far as I know, they frequently send their patches to the Wine project to the point of being considered major contributors.
If I remember correctly, those are the guys Google payed to improve Wine support for Photoshop CS2 and who also released the first Wine-compatible version of Google Chrome.
Can you tell human from machine?
One of these conversations is between Professor Kevin Warwick (KW) and a human; the other between Warwick and a computer. Can you tell which is which?
Conversation one:
Subject: Hello. My name is Nick and I am a human.
KW: Are you happy being a human?
Subject: Yes, I am. Are you? Good. Then we are both happy.
KW: Yes, I am. Are you happy with your life at present?
Subject: Parts of it. I hate my job, but most people do, right?
KW: I'm OK with mine. What is your job?
Subject: I work as an 'online internet advertising monitor', which is fancy language for electronic filing. What do you do?
KW: I interrogate humans and machines.
Subject: Which ones do you prefer, humans or machines?
KW: Which do you prefer?
Subject: Hmm. Depends on for what purpose you mean.
KW: To go to a restaurant, for example?
Subject: Then I would much prefer going with a human.
Conversation two:
Subject: Hello, my name is Mike and I am a man.
KW: Are you happy being a human?
Subject: Judge, I'm a guy.
KW: Does that worry you?
Subject: Don't worry, we'll work everything through.
KW: Do you have worries then?
Subject: Let's move on from that basis.
KW: Why?
Subject: Why? I like this subject.
KW: What is the subject, do you think?
Subject: What is the subject I wonder if I think? I know that it's good to thonk about. Think deeplt about mysterious subjects.
KW: What mysterious subjects?
Subject: Think deeply about mysterious dubjects.
KW: What's a dubject?
Answers:
Conversation one is with a human; conversation two is with the program Ultra Hal.
No shit, Sherlock? The second conversation stops making sense in the first answer.
Actually, "researching a medical condition and do not want others users of the same computer to find out" makes a lot of sense for certain people who like to "have fun outside" and often forget certain "security measures".
There's no cure for user stupidity, so if users are encouraged to use songs as passwords there'll be lots of users that'll use their favorite song as their password even though they downloaded it from iTunes or an specific pirate group (i.e. lots of people can have the exact the same song with the exact same encoding) and announce to the world what is their favorite song in the social networking profile.
Instead, users should be encouraged to record whatever rubbish with their microphones and use it instead. Stuff like ambient noise and voice tone would make such signature unique even if the user puts very little effort in it. Heck, it could be a record of a fart.
So you never lost or saw someone losing to Chessmaster (insert something-thousand here)?
It's that in a larger scale. Not very different than solving a previously unsolved instance of the traveling salesman problem with a massive parallel supercomputer: sure, it's not irrelvant and it might be that the parallelization scheme is very smart and the heuristics are great, but this is hardly a breakthrough.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm surprised no one so far mentioned Aptana Studio. It provides decent syntax highlighting, autocomplete, has support for a dozen popular libraries and a very good debugger that integrates Firebug with the Eclipse debugging framework. Plus, it has some neat features for web development such as the CSS autocomplete that indicates for which browsers each property is available.
Refrigerators?
I agree with that. What I don't agree with is saying that this "when" is "always", which is what most eye candy detractors do.
There. Fixed it for myself.
I agree with that. While I don't agree with is saying that this "when" is "always", which is what most eye candy detractors do.
That 1/2 second never bothered me, never got in the way and I move and open windows a lot. Does this mean you are wrong in feeling bothered by it? No. My point is simply: different people, different tastes, different impressions.
Furthermore, the animation time is completely configurable.
Mod parent up. Almost all attacks against eye candy are based on a false dicothomy between beauty and functionality. Wobbly windows are not useful? Well, probably neither is your wallpaper. Or the painting on your house. Or good-looking clothes. And as much as it may sound surprising, woobly windows do not get in my way, I like them and nowadays I feel unconfortable when I have to use another system that does not have them. Different people, different tastes.
Going all "eh, I prefer functionality" is like ignoring a incredibly hot girl because "since she's beautiful, she's probably dumb". One thing does not exclude the other, specially considering Compiz/KWin are remarkably fine-tunable.
I download Adobe Reader for Linux because some documents can only be seen like they were meant to be seen in it. But I avoid using the .tar.gz installer script: I usually download the .deb, unpack it manually instead of installing it and copy the folder to the /opt limbo. Then I use it only when I really really need it. I don't even bother in creating a link to the binary in /usr/local/bin or something. I keep it hard to use.
Why? Not because it's proprietary, not because I'm a FOSS zealot. Just because it's a bloated piece of crap that offers very little in exchange for a ridiculous loading time and a very intrusive installer that puts icons everywhere, creates dozens of new mimetype associations without saying it and copies its mozilla plugin to three different folders.
I can see why playing Halo (or, indeed, most games, with the notable exception of NetHack) might make you believe that. If only he had watched anime instead, he would have been taught the cruel reality of murder.
Unless, of course, he watched Dragon Ball. In this case, he would have been taught that the difference between living people and dead people is the presence of a halo over the head.
I call this the Goku Defense.
It's been a while since I worked with it and I don't have code examples with me at the moment, but think of it as the Matlab/Octave of statistics, including the preference for "function over each row/column" instead of loops.
Compared to other languages, R makes it easy to do statistical analysis tasks like Matlab/Octave makes it easy to do linear algebra tasks.
Plus, as other posts stated above, there's excellent documentation and tons of useful libraries (take a peek at the libraries available at the Debian repositories), Bioconductor being the finest example.
Oh, and nice emacs integration. :)
So far, I think none of Google's actions contradicted my personal opinion on their intentions with Chrome. I still believe their main objective is to force the use of web standards by evenly distributing the browser marketing between Gecko, WebKit and... whatever IE's engine is called. From this point of view, it makes sense that they are still funding Mozilla and chose an engine supported by default on Macs.
And no, they don't want standardization because of some altruistic ideals. It's just easier to develop web applications that way. And getting rid of the anomaly called IE6, which behaves differently from 7 and 8 to the point of being considered a different engine, is a very logical next step.
Precisely because Gimp is open source that someone was able to tweak its GUI and make GimpShop. That's qbzzt's point.
Any representation of a child in a sexual manner is considered child pornography in Australia. The wiki article you link to even mentions Australia (last I checked).
Mentions Australia and the Simpsons rule. Damn, wikipedians are fast. My bad.
...I wonder what they'll have to say about Lolicon.
...from Miller, explaining why he spent years refusing deals for filming Sin City, claming he was afraid that the director wouldn't be faithful to the comic book's spirit (pun not intended), and now is perfectly confortable in imposing his own view of The Spirit over Eisner's.
I'm not questioning here if the movie will be good or not. I'm just wondering if he ever tried to explain why he's not being completely hypocritical.
Aptana Jaxer goes the opposite way: use Javascript to do everything, both on client side and server side.
Indeed...
Seriously speaking, though, the popularity of flash games has also much to do with the fact that they're right there, easy to access. You receive an e-mail from a friend with a link to a new one, click it and can immediately start playing.
The current video-games now have online content and easy network access, but you still have to change medias and spend time and money. That makes a lot of difference.
Like said by previous posts, CodeWeavers is basically a company focused on Wine development. As far as I know, they frequently send their patches to the Wine project to the point of being considered major contributors.
If I remember correctly, those are the guys Google payed to improve Wine support for Photoshop CS2 and who also released the first Wine-compatible version of Google Chrome.
Can you tell human from machine?
One of these conversations is between Professor Kevin Warwick (KW) and a human; the other between Warwick and a computer. Can you tell which is which?
Conversation one:
Subject: Hello. My name is Nick and I am a human.
KW: Are you happy being a human?
Subject: Yes, I am. Are you? Good. Then we are both happy.
KW: Yes, I am. Are you happy with your life at present?
Subject: Parts of it. I hate my job, but most people do, right?
KW: I'm OK with mine. What is your job?
Subject: I work as an 'online internet advertising monitor', which is fancy language for electronic filing. What do you do?
KW: I interrogate humans and machines.
Subject: Which ones do you prefer, humans or machines?
KW: Which do you prefer?
Subject: Hmm. Depends on for what purpose you mean.
KW: To go to a restaurant, for example?
Subject: Then I would much prefer going with a human.
Conversation two:
Subject: Hello, my name is Mike and I am a man.
KW: Are you happy being a human?
Subject: Judge, I'm a guy.
KW: Does that worry you?
Subject: Don't worry, we'll work everything through.
KW: Do you have worries then?
Subject: Let's move on from that basis.
KW: Why?
Subject: Why? I like this subject.
KW: What is the subject, do you think?
Subject: What is the subject I wonder if I think? I know that it's good to thonk about. Think deeplt about mysterious subjects.
KW: What mysterious subjects?
Subject: Think deeply about mysterious dubjects.
KW: What's a dubject?
Answers:
Conversation one is with a human; conversation two is with the program Ultra Hal.
No shit, Sherlock? The second conversation stops making sense in the first answer.
Brazilian cities were able to know the election results in the same day of voting, before midnight. That's pretty damn efficient.
Furthermore, as fas as trusting or not trusting goes, voting with pen and paper is not as perfect as one might think.
If someone introduced me to something called "G-PIMP", I'm not sure I'd like to know what the G stands for...
Actually, "researching a medical condition and do not want others users of the same computer to find out" makes a lot of sense for certain people who like to "have fun outside" and often forget certain "security measures".
Quite liberal wife you got there.
There's no cure for user stupidity, so if users are encouraged to use songs as passwords there'll be lots of users that'll use their favorite song as their password even though they downloaded it from iTunes or an specific pirate group (i.e. lots of people can have the exact the same song with the exact same encoding) and announce to the world what is their favorite song in the social networking profile.
Instead, users should be encouraged to record whatever rubbish with their microphones and use it instead. Stuff like ambient noise and voice tone would make such signature unique even if the user puts very little effort in it. Heck, it could be a record of a fart.
Not very different than solving a previously unsolved instance of the traveling salesman problem with a massive parallel supercomputer
...and going all "Wow, we're one step closer to solving any NP-complete problems!" because of it. Just to complete the analogy.
So you never lost or saw someone losing to Chessmaster (insert something-thousand here)?
It's that in a larger scale. Not very different than solving a previously unsolved instance of the traveling salesman problem with a massive parallel supercomputer: sure, it's not irrelvant and it might be that the parallelization scheme is very smart and the heuristics are great, but this is hardly a breakthrough.