Like the GP said, I'm glad we're at least finally able to have a discussion about IE's competitive performance versus other browsers, instead of the number of rendering bugs, workarounds, and hacks required to support it. I don't exactly pay a lot of attention to the latest browser benchmark news with regard to cheating, but it's clear that the IE team has made enormous improvements. Look at the relative performance of IE8 versus the field, and IE9 versus the field. They've gone from orders of magnitude behind to being one third of the front-of-the-pack regarding performance. I never thought I'd see a performance battle between IE, Opera, and Chrome for the top spot, but here we are. Firefox will catch up I'm sure, but I'm still extremely impressed with the ground that the IE team has made up. They deserve to be commended for that, not accused of cheating. Cheating is the sore loser's excuse why he lost.
the summary is that the performance differences are explained by relatively small bugs in Firefox, bugs in IE9, and bugs in the benchmarks, not due to any major architectural issues in Firefox
So are you saying the performance difference doesn't exist? Or, if it does exist, why do we care what the reasons are? Are you just apologizing for Firefox?
Let IE9 have its day, the IE team has earned it. They've put in a lot of hard work to finally release their first browser that is actually "good". It's taken them 15 years to do it, but at least they finally managed. Here's to seeing usage of all other IE versions drop.
It's easy enough to build something quickly that works well, but it won't be cheap. It's easy enough to build something quickly that doesn't cost a lot, but it won't work well. It's easy enough to build something that works well and doesn't cost a lot, but it won't be done quickly.
I was hoping I would see that listed. Myself and my friend literally burst out laughing when the terrorists threatened to download "the accumulated wealth of the world" and abscond with it on removable media.
... none of which should be necessary. This is the reason why people malign the site. It's a bait-and-switch site, even if there are ways to get around it (but you shouldn't need to in the first place).
What other websites do you have to do the same with to get the information you're looking for? Can you name even one? There's obviously a reason why expert sex change is listed by so many people in the comments here.
While an in-depth look at HTML 5 is really cool and all, does anyone have a link to a video of Discovery's approach and landing? I found one on space.com but it's only 1:30 and doesn't have a lot of the chatter between Discovery and control.
I played the demo - gameplay graphics still suck and it's still insanely hard.
What, do you completely suck? I played through the demo three times to mess with the various classes. I think one of my siblings died in a battle, once. After the battle ended they jumped up again, and off we went. Not even the ogre was able to do a whole lot of damage before dying.
The only tragedy is that so many geeks are attracted by it as a quasi-religious substitute for the supernatural glory of the heavens.
No, I think the glory we see in space is the reason why so many people are attracted to it. It's not a substitute, it's the reason. It's hard to look at a picture of M51 or Andromeda or the Eagle nebula without getting inspired.
It doesn't support anything actually useful. There's a list of supported/unsupported features in the article. You can scroll down that list and easily find which features the company I work for uses to produce our Flash content. Those features are easy to find because they're all marked "unsupported".
Marginally useful for advertising and other non-interactive vector graphics, useless for anything with interactivity, video, or sound.
I still perceive difference between running Google docs in Chrome vs running it in Firefox 4 b13pre (it is noticeably slower in the later).
Does "slower" indicate that Javascript performance is worse, or that rendering speed is worse? Firefox lags quite a bit at rendering speed (especially with Firebug running), I can notice that in my own applications. It will execute the code quickly, but it takes its time to update the display. It sounds like you're seeing an issue with page rendering speed, not Javascript execution speed.
It's a little like that. Right now most of the fighting is between Javascript and rendering speed. Javascript performance is definitely no longer a bottleneck, a lot of work has been done there by a lot of people and all of the current browsers are orders of magnitude faster than browsers 5 years ago. Rendering speed is still an issue though, it doesn't do any good if I can manipulate the entire DOM in milliseconds if it takes the browser several seconds to render what I did.
But don't worry, even if it's boring for you the end result is better browsers all around.
It sounds stupid (given that most of us on/. make money by writing software) but it left a sour taste in my mouth.
And are you really that myopic that you are unable to realize that the software has changed a lot since you've last tried it (assuming the last time you tried it was when it had ads), and that maybe you should give it another shot to see how it goes?
I mean, yeah, if Sony came out with the wonder-hardware that did exactly what I wanted, I would be leery. But if they got up and explicitly said that this has no malware, DRM, etc, and other people say the same, I may at least give it a try. I wouldn't want to give Sony any of my money, but I may at least try it. With Opera you don't even have to pay them.
It makes sense for Apple to do this. Opera crashes fairly often and younger kids may not know how to handle it. It requires a certain amount of experience to handle these situations and recognize that some applications are just poorly written.
WTF? Apple is now the "crash police"? Whoaaaaa there kid, we've had a report from someone that their brother's girlfriend's cousin heard about this application crashing. If that happens you will be completely and utterly alone, unable to do anything unless you double-click to start the program again. You better consent to downloading this.
Of course, a professional company like Opera, who essentially makes a single product and has made it cross-platform for a decade, has many more crash problems than the latest game company run by a kid who just recently became able to buy tobacco.
Slashdot Mirror
Was the exact same text you posted a minute earlier in the same thread not enough?
Like the GP said, I'm glad we're at least finally able to have a discussion about IE's competitive performance versus other browsers, instead of the number of rendering bugs, workarounds, and hacks required to support it. I don't exactly pay a lot of attention to the latest browser benchmark news with regard to cheating, but it's clear that the IE team has made enormous improvements. Look at the relative performance of IE8 versus the field, and IE9 versus the field. They've gone from orders of magnitude behind to being one third of the front-of-the-pack regarding performance. I never thought I'd see a performance battle between IE, Opera, and Chrome for the top spot, but here we are. Firefox will catch up I'm sure, but I'm still extremely impressed with the ground that the IE team has made up. They deserve to be commended for that, not accused of cheating. Cheating is the sore loser's excuse why he lost.
the summary is that the performance differences are explained by relatively small bugs in Firefox, bugs in IE9, and bugs in the benchmarks, not due to any major architectural issues in Firefox
So are you saying the performance difference doesn't exist? Or, if it does exist, why do we care what the reasons are? Are you just apologizing for Firefox?
Let IE9 have its day, the IE team has earned it. They've put in a lot of hard work to finally release their first browser that is actually "good". It's taken them 15 years to do it, but at least they finally managed. Here's to seeing usage of all other IE versions drop.
Your customers are getting shafted.
It's easy enough to build something quickly that works well, but it won't be cheap.
It's easy enough to build something quickly that doesn't cost a lot, but it won't work well.
It's easy enough to build something that works well and doesn't cost a lot, but it won't be done quickly.
I was hoping I would see that listed. Myself and my friend literally burst out laughing when the terrorists threatened to download "the accumulated wealth of the world" and abscond with it on removable media.
It's not Google's responsibility to prop up their shitty business model, let them sue.
... none of which should be necessary. This is the reason why people malign the site. It's a bait-and-switch site, even if there are ways to get around it (but you shouldn't need to in the first place).
What other websites do you have to do the same with to get the information you're looking for? Can you name even one? There's obviously a reason why expert sex change is listed by so many people in the comments here.
I don't think it ever returned with one. It also captured intelset VI for repairs, and released it again.
It did capture several satellites, Hubble being one of them. I'm not sure if it ever pulled one into its bay, shut the doors, and came home though.
Only 2:30, but here is NASA's landing video from their Youtube channel:
http://www.youtube.com/user/NASAtelevision#p/a/724782A8B8BE3EE5/0/Drv0SS1rCpk
While an in-depth look at HTML 5 is really cool and all, does anyone have a link to a video of Discovery's approach and landing? I found one on space.com but it's only 1:30 and doesn't have a lot of the chatter between Discovery and control.
Now how about we get you fellas a good ass bookmarks manager, huh?
You're having problems managing your ass bookmarks, are you?
I played the demo - gameplay graphics still suck and it's still insanely hard.
What, do you completely suck? I played through the demo three times to mess with the various classes. I think one of my siblings died in a battle, once. After the battle ended they jumped up again, and off we went. Not even the ogre was able to do a whole lot of damage before dying.
The only tragedy is that so many geeks are attracted by it as a quasi-religious substitute for the supernatural glory of the heavens.
No, I think the glory we see in space is the reason why so many people are attracted to it. It's not a substitute, it's the reason. It's hard to look at a picture of M51 or Andromeda or the Eagle nebula without getting inspired.
It doesn't support anything actually useful. There's a list of supported/unsupported features in the article. You can scroll down that list and easily find which features the company I work for uses to produce our Flash content. Those features are easy to find because they're all marked "unsupported".
Marginally useful for advertising and other non-interactive vector graphics, useless for anything with interactivity, video, or sound.
I can't imagine a greater infringement of civil liberties than living like the Americans, with a gun pointed at them every second of their lives.
I can't imagine that either, and I'm an American.
(note: there is currently no one pointing a gun at me, nor a cop looking at me, nor a camera recording me)
I still perceive difference between running Google docs in Chrome vs running it in Firefox 4 b13pre (it is noticeably slower in the later).
Does "slower" indicate that Javascript performance is worse, or that rendering speed is worse? Firefox lags quite a bit at rendering speed (especially with Firebug running), I can notice that in my own applications. It will execute the code quickly, but it takes its time to update the display. It sounds like you're seeing an issue with page rendering speed, not Javascript execution speed.
It's a little like that. Right now most of the fighting is between Javascript and rendering speed. Javascript performance is definitely no longer a bottleneck, a lot of work has been done there by a lot of people and all of the current browsers are orders of magnitude faster than browsers 5 years ago. Rendering speed is still an issue though, it doesn't do any good if I can manipulate the entire DOM in milliseconds if it takes the browser several seconds to render what I did.
But don't worry, even if it's boring for you the end result is better browsers all around.
Any site with this would be permanently added to my blocked sites list.
That's OK, people using IE6 don't have a "blocked sites list" that they maintain.
It would be like giving money to a bank without deposit/FDIC insurance.
Yes, something else that all 15-year olds should be expected to understand.
You keep referring to this 15 year old as if she is facebook's customer.
No I'm not, I'm speaking of her as Facebook's user. Facebook provides several services, and she is a user of some of them.
It sounds stupid (given that most of us on /. make money by writing software) but it left a sour taste in my mouth.
And are you really that myopic that you are unable to realize that the software has changed a lot since you've last tried it (assuming the last time you tried it was when it had ads), and that maybe you should give it another shot to see how it goes?
I mean, yeah, if Sony came out with the wonder-hardware that did exactly what I wanted, I would be leery. But if they got up and explicitly said that this has no malware, DRM, etc, and other people say the same, I may at least give it a try. I wouldn't want to give Sony any of my money, but I may at least try it. With Opera you don't even have to pay them.
It makes sense for Apple to do this. Opera crashes fairly often and younger kids may not know how to handle it. It requires a certain amount of experience to handle these situations and recognize that some applications are just poorly written.
WTF? Apple is now the "crash police"? Whoaaaaa there kid, we've had a report from someone that their brother's girlfriend's cousin heard about this application crashing. If that happens you will be completely and utterly alone, unable to do anything unless you double-click to start the program again. You better consent to downloading this.
Of course, a professional company like Opera, who essentially makes a single product and has made it cross-platform for a decade, has many more crash problems than the latest game company run by a kid who just recently became able to buy tobacco.
It's not actually different, Apple just wants you to think it's different.