Without fully featured versions of AdBlock, Noscript, FlashBlock, Web Developer, and Greasemonkey, I won't be switching over anytime soon
You're behind the times, I think. Chrome has full native support for userscripts (so you don't need Greasemonkey), and versions of AdBlock and FlashBlock that work just as well as in Firefox (and are just as fully-featured).
Check chrome://extensions/, it's where extensions and userscripts go (and where you can configure them). I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.
Gecko is probably a big one. WebKit as a whole is just faster and more efficient than Gecko... Oh, and Google also puts a lot of effort into optimization tricks everywhere. Another big thing is probably XUL.
Another big thing is probably the extensions, and how far you can go with them. Chrome has extensions but they can't control your browser. Everything goes with web pages and JS instead of XUL.
I'm sorry but I don't consider Chrome to be a 'light weight' browser. It's memory footprint is right up there with the others, especially since each tab is isolated.
This is to be expected with such an interesting idea of making a process out of everything. I'm thinking the "lightweight" lies in its responsiveness and speed rather than its memory footprint - heck, RAM is barely an issue anymore in these days of 4GB RAM inside netbooks.
So did you somehow improve OOo itself in ways you had to or found more convenient while writing the book? Then yes, you're doing a good thing, even if the book sucks. (Heck, everybody knows Yo Frankie was unplayable as a game...)
There are more results than just writing the book itself, and that is improving the software it was made in.
There's a few software developers in the team itself that improve Blender as they make the movie. Also, everyone working on the movie itself is actually working fulltime, they deserve to be paid (and actually are).
'Something UI designers have known for a long time is that the simpler an interface looks, the faster it will seem,' said director of Firefox Mike Beltzner during the presentation.
I would much rather say that good, simple UI design actually makes the interface faster because, you know, it's faster to work with.
Plus there's a little bit less to render, I guess.
I didn't consider Apple into the story for even a moment.
This is about a major site switching to a better platform - one that works properly on all kinds of devices and *gasp!* even makes it easier to search and index on the net!
Google has an agreement with Adobe about Chrome. I mean, they're even working together to make the Flash plugin inside Chrome as good as possible.
And heck, Flash exists on mobile devices, game consoles, electronic billboards, PDAs... That clause somehow doesn't seem to work out, or it exists because they already have agreements with certain third parties regarding these functionalities.
After this, the use of Flash should be going back to just one thing again: animation.
That's right, there should be no reason your entire SITE should be coded in Flash, blocking easy content searching and tracking along the way. After this, if you want your site look pretty with sounds and animation, you can at least do it with HTML. No reason to use Flash anymore.
But even then, there is content that's just easier to make or distribute in Flash than as a website, and that's things like cartoons, and perhaps games (I'd say mostly the already existing Flash games here, though).
Oh, oops. Thanks for correcting. At least that LTS isn't out yet, which means that there's a tiny bit of time left to fix it before release (or revert to a more, well, stable version).
Not having a separate root account is a HUGE mistake. That's one of the biggest advantages to Linux to me. I know you can technically create a root account in Ubuntu, but they change all the packages so that it doesn't matter if you have one.
Huh? Ubuntu HAS a root account. They just disabled direct switching to root using su by default, and this can easily be turned back on.
Also, there is a reason everything is command-line driven in every "hardcore" distro. It works. Trying to do things in Ubuntu makes me want to claw my eyes out, it takes minutes to find what I want when it would just be a one line change in a configuration file. Plus, then the guis are just as unintuitive as the command line, but slower and generally are more bug prone.
An intuitive GUI will have you find the options quickly and easily. Can't find an option? Suggest a GUI change that makes more sense. In the end, a GUI to change settings is more convenient because all settings are there and you don't have to check manuals or even the net to find out what extra config settings an application supports. But really, this is a case-by-case basis on both the applications' side and the users' side, I'd say. Also, Ubuntu doesn't remove the functionality of having you edit config files by hand at all.
Slashdot Mirror
Without fully featured versions of AdBlock, Noscript, FlashBlock, Web Developer, and Greasemonkey, I won't be switching over anytime soon
You're behind the times, I think. Chrome has full native support for userscripts (so you don't need Greasemonkey), and versions of AdBlock and FlashBlock that work just as well as in Firefox (and are just as fully-featured).
Check chrome://extensions/, it's where extensions and userscripts go (and where you can configure them). I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.
Gecko is probably a big one. WebKit as a whole is just faster and more efficient than Gecko... Oh, and Google also puts a lot of effort into optimization tricks everywhere. Another big thing is probably XUL.
Another big thing is probably the extensions, and how far you can go with them. Chrome has extensions but they can't control your browser. Everything goes with web pages and JS instead of XUL.
I'm sorry but I don't consider Chrome to be a 'light weight' browser. It's memory footprint is right up there with the others, especially since each tab is isolated.
This is to be expected with such an interesting idea of making a process out of everything. I'm thinking the "lightweight" lies in its responsiveness and speed rather than its memory footprint - heck, RAM is barely an issue anymore in these days of 4GB RAM inside netbooks.
Memory leaks in Firefox likely have been around ever since 1.0, since back then the browser wouldn't even start up for a fair amount of people.
Mozilla shouldn't have started from the Netscape codebase, but hey, if they didn't, maybe the web wouldn't be progressing as much now.
It was probably just you. :P
Volunteers will always be 100% cheaper than professionals
Don't forget that the volunteers in this project are also professionals who are being paid full-time while working on this.
Still, with such a small team, yes, it is still cheaper to make.
So did you somehow improve OOo itself in ways you had to or found more convenient while writing the book? Then yes, you're doing a good thing, even if the book sucks. (Heck, everybody knows Yo Frankie was unplayable as a game...)
There are more results than just writing the book itself, and that is improving the software it was made in.
There's a few software developers in the team itself that improve Blender as they make the movie. Also, everyone working on the movie itself is actually working fulltime, they deserve to be paid (and actually are).
Well, for example, I would pay to give them some support, improving Blender and any FOSS tools used in the long run.
That's the first thing you notice?
Aren't you the one behind the times? It works fine in 3.6.
IE9. You know, the browser nobody has yet.
'Something UI
designers have known for a long time is that the simpler an interface
looks, the faster it will seem,' said director of Firefox Mike Beltzner
during the presentation.
I would much rather say that good, simple UI design actually makes the interface faster because, you know, it's faster to work with.
Plus there's a little bit less to render, I guess.
You're right, I couldn't select the "highlight me" text! All the other text was fine, though.
I wonder if this is a bug in the browsers (unlikely, I use Chrome, not Firefox!), or a bug on Scribd's site. My guess is the latter.
You should probably switch away from IE6.
I'm kidding, I'm kidding! =P
I didn't consider Apple into the story for even a moment.
This is about a major site switching to a better platform - one that works properly on all kinds of devices and *gasp!* even makes it easier to search and index on the net!
Google has an agreement with Adobe about Chrome. I mean, they're even working together to make the Flash plugin inside Chrome as good as possible.
And heck, Flash exists on mobile devices, game consoles, electronic billboards, PDAs... That clause somehow doesn't seem to work out, or it exists because they already have agreements with certain third parties regarding these functionalities.
After this, the use of Flash should be going back to just one thing again: animation.
That's right, there should be no reason your entire SITE should be coded in Flash, blocking easy content searching and tracking along the way. After this, if you want your site look pretty with sounds and animation, you can at least do it with HTML. No reason to use Flash anymore.
But even then, there is content that's just easier to make or distribute in Flash than as a website, and that's things like cartoons, and perhaps games (I'd say mostly the already existing Flash games here, though).
I hate that this page splits into multiple pages. Very lame.
Please leave unrelated personal opinions out of the article...
I can tell two things from your post just now:
1) You're a patriotist.
2) You can't stand humor that aims at stereotypes.
Oh, oops. Thanks for correcting. At least that LTS isn't out yet, which means that there's a tiny bit of time left to fix it before release (or revert to a more, well, stable version).
You need to upgrade to a proven, stable and powerful OS like Windows. IT JUST WORKS.
HAHAHAH Oh man! You can't be serious!
The bug affects the LTS version only, which is 8.04.
Not having a separate root account is a HUGE mistake. That's one of the biggest advantages to Linux to me. I know you can technically create a root account in Ubuntu, but they change all the packages so that it doesn't matter if you have one.
Huh? Ubuntu HAS a root account. They just disabled direct switching to root using su by default, and this can easily be turned back on.
Also, there is a reason everything is command-line driven in every "hardcore" distro. It works. Trying to do things in Ubuntu makes me want to claw my eyes out, it takes minutes to find what I want when it would just be a one line change in a configuration file. Plus, then the guis are just as unintuitive as the command line, but slower and generally are more bug prone.
An intuitive GUI will have you find the options quickly and easily. Can't find an option? Suggest a GUI change that makes more sense. In the end, a GUI to change settings is more convenient because all settings are there and you don't have to check manuals or even the net to find out what extra config settings an application supports. But really, this is a case-by-case basis on both the applications' side and the users' side, I'd say. Also, Ubuntu doesn't remove the functionality of having you edit config files by hand at all.
Well, LTS stands for long-term service, so it's a bit more suitable as a server distro.