First, slaves are not paid. There.
Second, you do realize that there is a huge difference in the cost of living between in Indian and the US, right?
Let me explain in terms you guys understand - food:
For US$1 ~ INR 50, you can get 2 or 3 solid meals at an average restaurant/fast food place. In US, 1 dollar gets you a can of coke or a small 100gm back of chips.
Do the math.
"Now exactly what are they bitching about that they haven't done on windows already."
They dont see the 'Start' button down at the left corner of their desktop. Give it to them, they will stop bitching.
The thing about Internet Explorer is that it is effectively insulated from SPI changes because it comes out with OS releases. If Microsoft needs to change an internal data structure in CF, Foundation, etc. in a way that would break an SPI, all they have to do is rev Internet Explorer to not use that SPI. Thus, it is safe for Internet Explorer to use any API or SPI. If Microsoft publishes the SPI as API, FireFox uses it, and Microsoft changes the data structure, Firefox breaks, and with "luck", so do Photoshop and Word....:-(
So you see, Microsoft has only three choices: A. don't publish that portion of the API, in which case some people complain because they're not able to get that extra 1% from being able to walk inside private data structures of the HFS+ Extents B-tree or whatever, B. publish that portion of the API, in which case they're stuck with that internal architecture and can't ever change it to improve performance, add features, etc., or C. publish the API and break it later, in which case developers scream again. It's a no-win.
The only thing one could possibly argue is that Internet Explorer shouldn't be using the SPI, either, to put them on equal footing. That said, since it's safe for them to do so, where's the harm? There's no monopoly involved, certainly.:-) And as you noted, many of those SPIs that Internet Explorer is trying out might become APIs at some point in the future. Having an app like Internet Explorer exercise them allows the engineers to figure out what works and what doesn't so that they don't get stuck supporting an API that isn't scalable, is hard to enhance, or isn't easily maintainable. In the long run, everybody benefits.
I'm certain that Microsoft doesn't do this to cripple Firefox or to make its own software look better. It's not a vast fruit-wing conspiracy.... Microsoft limits its public API exposure to ensure that the APIs are sustainable so third-party code doesn't break. If you don't care about that, use the SPI... just don't come crying when your app crashes on launch after a software update or whatever....:-)
Do you still feel the same way?
Wait, you say 'The problem is that we are worth more than our employers wish to pay us..' And you call your employers elite? Aren't you being elitist yourself?
"people will be so used to seeing all the sweet things that full Android phones"
Once again, slashdot user != typical user. Normal people want what they see on TV or what their friends have. Not something from videos in the developer section of google's website.
Exactly! Who needs to use the abundant processing power available on the client machines. Let the servers do all the processing, send back both the layout and data back to the client through the wire. Why care about bandwidth?
Slashdot Mirror
More details here: http://www.llvm.org/devmtg/2008-08/ (Look for the topic - Flash C Compiler: Compiling C code to the Adobe Flash Virtual Machine)
You post your ideas for Adobe here: http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/webforums/forum/categories.cfm?forumid=72&catid=755&entercat=y These forums are closely watched by the flash player team.
First, slaves are not paid. There. Second, you do realize that there is a huge difference in the cost of living between in Indian and the US, right? Let me explain in terms you guys understand - food: For US$1 ~ INR 50, you can get 2 or 3 solid meals at an average restaurant/fast food place. In US, 1 dollar gets you a can of coke or a small 100gm back of chips. Do the math.
Is he or is he not?
We got to know a lot about Apple's quality control process when they shipped iPods with viruses in them.
Photoshop subset inside Flash? Sounds like a great idea!!! Something like this: www.photoshopexpress.com.
This was a known vulnerability that was fixed in 9.0.124.0 http://blogs.adobe.com/psirt/2008/05/potential_flash_player_issue_u_1.html Just make sure u upgrade.
"Now exactly what are they bitching about that they haven't done on windows already." They dont see the 'Start' button down at the left corner of their desktop. Give it to them, they will stop bitching.
The thing about Internet Explorer is that it is effectively insulated from SPI changes because it comes out with OS releases. If Microsoft needs to change an internal data structure in CF, Foundation, etc. in a way that would break an SPI, all they have to do is rev Internet Explorer to not use that SPI. Thus, it is safe for Internet Explorer to use any API or SPI. If Microsoft publishes the SPI as API, FireFox uses it, and Microsoft changes the data structure, Firefox breaks, and with "luck", so do Photoshop and Word.... :-(
So you see, Microsoft has only three choices: A. don't publish that portion of the API, in which case some people complain because they're not able to get that extra 1% from being able to walk inside private data structures of the HFS+ Extents B-tree or whatever, B. publish that portion of the API, in which case they're stuck with that internal architecture and can't ever change it to improve performance, add features, etc., or C. publish the API and break it later, in which case developers scream again. It's a no-win.
The only thing one could possibly argue is that Internet Explorer shouldn't be using the SPI, either, to put them on equal footing. That said, since it's safe for them to do so, where's the harm? There's no monopoly involved, certainly. :-) And as you noted, many of those SPIs that Internet Explorer is trying out might become APIs at some point in the future. Having an app like Internet Explorer exercise them allows the engineers to figure out what works and what doesn't so that they don't get stuck supporting an API that isn't scalable, is hard to enhance, or isn't easily maintainable. In the long run, everybody benefits.
I'm certain that Microsoft doesn't do this to cripple Firefox or to make its own software look better. It's not a vast fruit-wing conspiracy.... Microsoft limits its public API exposure to ensure that the APIs are sustainable so third-party code doesn't break. If you don't care about that, use the SPI... just don't come crying when your app crashes on launch after a software update or whatever.... :-)
Do you still feel the same way?
Sliverlight is a competitor for the Flash Player, not AIR. WPF/E at best can be termed as a wannabe competitor of AIR.
Wait, you say 'The problem is that we are worth more than our employers wish to pay us..' And you call your employers elite? Aren't you being elitist yourself?
Now I know why the 'Redundant' modifier exists!
"people will be so used to seeing all the sweet things that full Android phones" Once again, slashdot user != typical user. Normal people want what they see on TV or what their friends have. Not something from videos in the developer section of google's website.
Exactly! Who needs to use the abundant processing power available on the client machines. Let the servers do all the processing, send back both the layout and data back to the client through the wire. Why care about bandwidth?
Patch Tuesday 1 (30 days) Patch Tuesday 2 (30 days) . . . You see what I am getting at?