Aside from the two features you tested, you mean? Granted, lack of PNG support IS a big thing. I'm surprised it doesn't just rely on any helper libraries to handle many different formats.
Most of the times when I tried F-Spot, it just keeps crashing on me.
Thanks, we now know you are biased. This is something based on personal experience, much like how Linux would "not work" for some people on some computers.
Less Mono is good, though. Better speeds, less dependencies.
Then one might see a potential loss on Nintendo's side in the fact that it isn't sold by Nintendo anymore. Unless production cost outweighs selling cost at this point.
Is this just unbased hate? Please explain why this would be the case. JS performance IS quite good on most modern browsers right now, switching languages wouldn't change that (much) anymore.
Plus imagine the hundreds of thousands of websites that become inaccessible if every browser started ditching JS right now.
So far, perhaps blur effects and fullscreening! Oh, and hardware acceleration I guess, but browsers are already starting to change their code to use hardware acceleration more.
On Linux, so far it seems to be on par with the Flash plugin when it comes to performance. With some effort, this could at least be faster still than Adobe's own plugin, which is good news.
It also says something about how crappy Flash performs on Linux in general.
This is really, really impressive. I was watching the sample sbemail and honestly couldn't believe this wasn't an actual Flash plugin object. It ran almost completely perfectly, even on this years-old single core PC.
Some problems with the easter eggs at the end, but the rest... DAMN. This stuff may work better than actual Flash on my PC!
Been using it on Linux for almost two years now. If you're running the nightlies it should be around version 6, which has everything current Chrome has.
And yes, it probably all looks very basic. I also have no idea how well it performs on a Mac.:P
Did you mean JavaScript? The Java plugin (used for applets) is pretty much the same in all browsers, since it's the exact same plugin. All major browsers have actually been working on JS performance, hence you will probably not much of a difference there.
I'm actually seeing Chrome performance becoming better with each new release. And I'm not talking just JS, I'm also talking page rendering and the browser's own responsiveness. Google has stated their views on the importance of speed several times in several places already, I won't reiterate all that stuff here, but they're definitely trying their best to make the web experience faster. And them using and improving WebKit automatically also improves browsers like Safari, which also use WebKit.
And hey, Chrome is 4 years old already, I wouldn't exactly call it "new" anymore.
Depends. You may not need more. Heck, Linux servers manage just fine with just a CLI because of the amount of things you can run from just the commandline.
Maybe they achieved their original goal at some point and then set some new ones - you won't have much to do as a browser developer otherwise. Though their goal should definitely be going back to the "lightweight and fast" thing.
Slashdot Mirror
A quick persistent email/chat hybrid.
For me this is no where near f-spot technically.
Aside from the two features you tested, you mean? Granted, lack of PNG support IS a big thing. I'm surprised it doesn't just rely on any helper libraries to handle many different formats.
Most of the times when I tried F-Spot, it just keeps crashing on me.
Thanks, we now know you are biased. This is something based on personal experience, much like how Linux would "not work" for some people on some computers.
Less Mono is good, though. Better speeds, less dependencies.
Sure they are. Ctrl+H.
None of them are stupid enough to actually publicly announce they know it's bogus.
Then one might see a potential loss on Nintendo's side in the fact that it isn't sold by Nintendo anymore. Unless production cost outweighs selling cost at this point.
But Zappa himself disapproves of drugs!
Having "Zappa" in your article immediately makes you "not a hippie", though.
Is this just unbased hate? Please explain why this would be the case. JS performance IS quite good on most modern browsers right now, switching languages wouldn't change that (much) anymore.
Plus imagine the hundreds of thousands of websites that become inaccessible if every browser started ditching JS right now.
So far, perhaps blur effects and fullscreening! Oh, and hardware acceleration I guess, but browsers are already starting to change their code to use hardware acceleration more.
On Linux, so far it seems to be on par with the Flash plugin when it comes to performance. With some effort, this could at least be faster still than Adobe's own plugin, which is good news.
It also says something about how crappy Flash performs on Linux in general.
This is really, really impressive. I was watching the sample sbemail and honestly couldn't believe this wasn't an actual Flash plugin object. It ran almost completely perfectly, even on this years-old single core PC.
Some problems with the easter eggs at the end, but the rest... DAMN. This stuff may work better than actual Flash on my PC!
...This is how you lose readers.
Or apples and windows.
*ducks*
You just named two things that aren't codecs. Way to go.
The next release is going to be codenamed "volcano", if it helps.
Well, it certainly is a contrary point of view... :P
Been using it on Linux for almost two years now. If you're running the nightlies it should be around version 6, which has everything current Chrome has.
And yes, it probably all looks very basic. I also have no idea how well it performs on a Mac. :P
Did you mean JavaScript? The Java plugin (used for applets) is pretty much the same in all browsers, since it's the exact same plugin. All major browsers have actually been working on JS performance, hence you will probably not much of a difference there.
I'm actually seeing Chrome performance becoming better with each new release. And I'm not talking just JS, I'm also talking page rendering and the browser's own responsiveness. Google has stated their views on the importance of speed several times in several places already, I won't reiterate all that stuff here, but they're definitely trying their best to make the web experience faster. And them using and improving WebKit automatically also improves browsers like Safari, which also use WebKit.
And hey, Chrome is 4 years old already, I wouldn't exactly call it "new" anymore.
Not the... goat titties?
WOOOOOOOOOOOOSH
Depends. You may not need more. Heck, Linux servers manage just fine with just a CLI because of the amount of things you can run from just the commandline.
Yeah? Go ahead, see how well you do.
Maybe they achieved their original goal at some point and then set some new ones - you won't have much to do as a browser developer otherwise. Though their goal should definitely be going back to the "lightweight and fast" thing.
Chrome does the same thing - process separation definitely helps here.