Exactly so -- like, perhaps, rush hour into Manhattan. Or Boston. I've done those, and it was literally painful. It gave me two things to curse: the fricking traffic, AND the pain in my foot.
Can't speak for other people, but I warm up my car so that the engine is running smoothly before I head out into the 10-degree winter weather up here in the northern U.S. It's for the engine's sake, not mine.
Manual transmissions are a pain in the rear -- or the ankle and foot, actually -- when you have to drive in bumper-to-bumper city traffic. Automatic transmission is much nicer in those cases.
And that's why Linux fanboys (the real hardcore ones anyway) are all incredibly unique. You have to meet them all; just meeting one or two doesn't do justice to the rest of the worshippers.
From the source report (PDF, 387kb), we also read this: "Passwords were stored in cleartext in the database and were extracted through a SQL Injection vulnerability."
So RockYou was rather security unconcious from the beginning. Cleartext instead of hashed? C'mon.
How can you say the Open PC has more power than the Mac Mini? That Mac's 2.26ghz Core Duo runs rings around the Open PC's 1.6ghz Atom, and its graphics card beats it out too.
My post was about market segments, since I was responding to one concerning a topic that marketers call "audience". Flash is not despised by "a large number of people". It is despised by a sizable number of technically-minded people. That's a big difference.
But hey, if you want to read some kind of insult into my comments, be my guest.
Then trying to get them to understand that their desire for something similar on their site requires using something despised by a large number of geeks (i.e. Flash).
Fixed that for you.
Most people on the Internet think Flash is just part of it. And many of them (I'd guess most) actually like it.
While JavaScript runs on the local box, Flash typically begins running as it downloads, so an animation may stutter if it is struggling with the download. I was assuming that this remained true with this JS interpreter, and surmised that some of the sluggishness could have been due to the SWF file downloading slowly; however, I could be wrong. The code might need to download the whole file before interpeting it.
I checked out the posted demos on my iPhone. Although they were a tad sluggish (particularly the star fade-in on the first demo), frankly, it wasn't bad. Some of the sluggishness could have just been because the demos are getting Slashdotted.
Personally, I'm a little more interested in PhoneGap, which lets you use JavaScript to create iPhone apps (outside the browser).
Your analogy is flawed. It only works if you and your son share a pool of height, and the gain of one could induce a reduction in the other. As it stands, your respective heights are completely unrelated, unlike Google and Bing's share of the market.
You're right. I was being facetious.
But just to add one comment... I've read in the past that a surprising number of people will try a different search engine rather than wade through multiple pages of results on the same search engine. In short, you should be suspicious of any "market share" analysis of the search engine industry that adds up to a concise 100%: the numbers should actually add up to 110% or more, to account for these search engine polygamists. (Don't have a link handy for this, sorry. Mark me troll if you like.)
In other news, my 1-year-old child has gained massive weight and height, while I, unfortunately, have not gotten even a millimeter taller.
Google is the established leader, with a massive market share that is unlikely to grow much further. Bing is the new kid on the block, starting at zero. Of course Bing is going to grow. There is nothing else for it to do. Even if it's lousy, it is impossible for it to not gain share. This is like comparing the Zune marketshare with the iPod.
I have an iPhone. I've downloaded dozens of free "trial" apps. I purchased three of them, and use them several times a week. Example: although there are some free apps that do essentially the same thing, I find TideGraph to be better at reporting tides... same data, sure, but much better interface. Worth the two bucks.
I also know doctors who have some rather expensive medical-related paid apps, but that's a niche category.
Multiply it by the hundreds to thousands of cellphones within one cell... can you imagine how much power the cell tower much emit in order to charge all those phones?
FWIW: the article says that the charger makes electricity from "ambient WiFi signals" -- not from the cell tower. Allegedly, at the trade show, "they were able to charge a BlackBerry from 30% to full in about 90 minutes."
Sheesh, retract the geek rage. All I did was point out that it's really heavy if all you want is a simple control, and it is.
No rage here. It seemed like you were complaining about something unnecessarily, and I meant my comment matter-of-factly. My apologies if it came across too strongly.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly so -- like, perhaps, rush hour into Manhattan. Or Boston. I've done those, and it was literally painful. It gave me two things to curse: the fricking traffic, AND the pain in my foot.
Thanks for the link. I had always heard five minutes (which is what I do).
Can't speak for other people, but I warm up my car so that the engine is running smoothly before I head out into the 10-degree winter weather up here in the northern U.S. It's for the engine's sake, not mine.
Manual transmissions are a pain in the rear -- or the ankle and foot, actually -- when you have to drive in bumper-to-bumper city traffic. Automatic transmission is much nicer in those cases.
And that's why Linux fanboys (the real hardcore ones anyway) are all incredibly unique. You have to meet them all; just meeting one or two doesn't do justice to the rest of the worshippers.
From the source report (PDF, 387kb), we also read this: "Passwords were stored in cleartext in the database and were extracted through a SQL Injection vulnerability."
So RockYou was rather security unconcious from the beginning. Cleartext instead of hashed? C'mon.
How can you say the Open PC has more power than the Mac Mini? That Mac's 2.26ghz Core Duo runs rings around the Open PC's 1.6ghz Atom, and its graphics card beats it out too.
My post was about market segments, since I was responding to one concerning a topic that marketers call "audience". Flash is not despised by "a large number of people". It is despised by a sizable number of technically-minded people. That's a big difference.
But hey, if you want to read some kind of insult into my comments, be my guest.
Which browser are you using?
I was using Safari on my iPhone.
On my desktop, the demos are fine.
Then trying to get them to understand that their desire for something similar on their site requires using something despised by a large number of geeks (i.e. Flash).
Fixed that for you.
Most people on the Internet think Flash is just part of it. And many of them (I'd guess most) actually like it.
I know this.
While JavaScript runs on the local box, Flash typically begins running as it downloads, so an animation may stutter if it is struggling with the download. I was assuming that this remained true with this JS interpreter, and surmised that some of the sluggishness could have been due to the SWF file downloading slowly; however, I could be wrong. The code might need to download the whole file before interpeting it.
I checked out the posted demos on my iPhone. Although they were a tad sluggish (particularly the star fade-in on the first demo), frankly, it wasn't bad. Some of the sluggishness could have just been because the demos are getting Slashdotted.
Personally, I'm a little more interested in PhoneGap, which lets you use JavaScript to create iPhone apps (outside the browser).
Your analogy is flawed. It only works if you and your son share a pool of height, and the gain of one could induce a reduction in the other. As it stands, your respective heights are completely unrelated, unlike Google and Bing's share of the market.
You're right. I was being facetious.
But just to add one comment... I've read in the past that a surprising number of people will try a different search engine rather than wade through multiple pages of results on the same search engine. In short, you should be suspicious of any "market share" analysis of the search engine industry that adds up to a concise 100%: the numbers should actually add up to 110% or more, to account for these search engine polygamists. (Don't have a link handy for this, sorry. Mark me troll if you like.)
In other news, my 1-year-old child has gained massive weight and height, while I, unfortunately, have not gotten even a millimeter taller.
Google is the established leader, with a massive market share that is unlikely to grow much further. Bing is the new kid on the block, starting at zero. Of course Bing is going to grow. There is nothing else for it to do. Even if it's lousy, it is impossible for it to not gain share. This is like comparing the Zune marketshare with the iPod.
I have an iPhone. I've downloaded dozens of free "trial" apps. I purchased three of them, and use them several times a week. Example: although there are some free apps that do essentially the same thing, I find TideGraph to be better at reporting tides... same data, sure, but much better interface. Worth the two bucks.
I also know doctors who have some rather expensive medical-related paid apps, but that's a niche category.
I call bullshit. There's no way that the tiny percentage of jailbroken iPhones could account for 75% of the apps in use.
If this isn't through jailbroken phones, then how are people pirating it? It's not like anyone has built a homebrew iPhone...
I use Sphider, but dang, the re-indexing function times out every time I try. I have to delete the index and run it as if it were new.
"Roundup Green is People!"
One look at that advertisement and I'm craving something other than an electronic cigarette.
Hmm. Do you need to borrow my vibrating earbuds?
What? You don't want to play as Jar-Jar? "Wesa got a grand MMO. That's why you no liking us meesa thinks."
Multiply it by the hundreds to thousands of cellphones within one cell ... can you imagine how much power the cell tower much emit in order to charge all those phones?
FWIW: the article says that the charger makes electricity from "ambient WiFi signals" -- not from the cell tower. Allegedly, at the trade show, "they were able to charge a BlackBerry from 30% to full in about 90 minutes."
Aside: your Financial Times link is paywalled. Here's another link that seems to describe the same story, but free: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iY8x-w1tBsBOZxnyJn8EmHFzQTaw
Could be nutritional... widespread use of high fructose corn syrup, for example.
Could be ethical... an increase in celebrity worship, for example.
Could be psychological... an increase of anxiety-producing news on every media channel, for example.
Could be all of the above.
your talking about kids braclets, they are hardly in a position to decide anything.
Children have a surprisingly strong effect on their parents' disposable income. Why do you think advertisers spend so much money advertising to kids?
Sheesh, retract the geek rage. All I did was point out that it's really heavy if all you want is a simple control, and it is.
No rage here. It seemed like you were complaining about something unnecessarily, and I meant my comment matter-of-factly. My apologies if it came across too strongly.