Actually, the reason I don't use PNGs isn't because of transparency (that would be nice, but can be approximated.) The reason I don't use it is because the color matching is shit. I can define a color that's the same as my background and it just won't match if it's a PNG. Fine in most browsers, not IE. So I have to have _either_ transparency _or_ reasonable background color matching.
Check out this page: (http://paralytic.buyclamsonline.com/comparison.ht ml)
The background color is #555577 and there are two square images filled with the same color (as per Photoshop.) They were saved as a 2 bit GIF and a 24 bit PNG with all the normal settings using the "Save For Web" function.
In Safari on the Mac, the images can't be seen. Same with OmniWeb. IE on the Mac has the PNG is slightly darker (and is obvious). With IE on the PC, the PNG is slightly lighter than the background and is still obvious.
Like I said, give me transparency or make it so I can make the PNG the same color as the background, but give me one of them!
We're going on and on as a country about just how crappy it is to live in other countries, with just cause.
But when did we get so damned coddled as a country that stopping our SUVs from getting through a street is the worst thing that can happen to us? I've been listening to some of the counter-protestors on my campus, and they seem to be the most thin-skinned reactionaries I have ever met. I'm not an avid anti-war person (though I oppose it), but I'd be embarrassed to be associated with group of people who can't think of anything more threatening to their daily lives than the possibility of blocked traffic.
The notion that the blocking of traffic endangers people through the blocking of emergency services is specious. Plenty of things block traffic a lot more often than protests do -- road work, parades, weather. Are those terrorism?
So I use your five songs illegally in my movie, my movie makes ten million dollars in profit and my release of the soundtrack makes another five million (with your work!) You don't think $750,000 is a reasonable punishment?
Uh, I think FreeBSD is UNIX, if it's a BSD. My understanding is that BSD code is UNIX and software actually derived from the AT&T sources is also UNIX. I'm sure I'm missing a lot of nuance and someone will point it out in great detail.
The maximum damages make sense if you think of them in the greater context. What if I start a company that sells bootleg copies DVDs? Or, what if I make a major motion picture and simply pull the soundtrack off the CDs in my library?
In both of those situations, a $150,000 punitive judgment would be fair in my eyes.
Right. That was my point. See, I responded to his assertion that Apple had never invented anything with that link, which suggested that Apple had invented firewire. To get there, I read the link and saw what it menat. Then I thought about what he said and saw that the link countered his assertion. So I presented the link as evidence that Apple _had_, in fact invented something. So I posted it here. And to it you responded, but yoe seem to have missed one or two of the steps in that progression.
ColorSync: Implementation is half the battle, but they didn't invent color matching. They made it work transparently.
QuickTime: QuickTime is more than just a codec. It's a time-based media framework that is unlike anything that came before it. Sorenson is just a piece of the puzzle, like M-JPEG and Cinepac.
How about network autodiscovery and physical networks that anyone could use? (AppleTalk and LocalTalk).
Or simple and obvious multiple monitors? Plug another video card in and get a bigger desktop. In 1987!
Perhaps you're blinded by the hatred you have for something that is pretty trivial in the scheme of things.
I think that for everyone, the fact that it's designed for developers is a drawback to usability. I typically think like a developer and when an OSS UI starts to suck, I clearly understand why. I still get mad, though. Even if I understand how and why it works and sucks, I still don't have to put up with it. That's my point.
I'm not sure what you point was, but I don't feel that developers need to change. They're doing what works for them. But, if they want to have their work appreciated on a larger scale or they want the unwashed masses of users not complain, they should consider investigating their practices.
(And I've more than once said "it works that way because I don't want to spend time to make it work any differently.")
I don't know about you, but when I'm writing code that other people are going to see, paid or not, I am extra anal about how it looks/runs. It bloody well better not have any bugs because I actually take pride in what I do. So, paid or not, I'm going to put a _lot_ of effort into making it right.
The thing that ought to keep open source software on track is the pride. If you're doing it because you like it (as everyone here is saying) then you ought to like it enough to do it right.
How about Fontographer? How about Freehand/Illustrator? I don't swing that way, but DreamWeaver or GoLive?
Final Cut Pro? Shake? Maya? Hell, iMovie.
Sorenson Squeeze?
Geez. Face it, sometimes quality software costs money. You can rattle your change and cackle while using the GIMP and I'll pay for Photoshop and actually be satisfied with my software.
One PC user couldn't read the webpage, another one couldn't read the article about the webpage. Sounds like it's the PC users who can't read. But I might be misreading it, having a Mac and all.
No, but contracts can. If Apple has a contract with a spare parts reseller that tells them that they can't resell for certain uses, then they (Apple) can go after the source of the parts.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the reason I don't use PNGs isn't because of transparency (that would be nice, but can be approximated.) The reason I don't use it is because the color matching is shit. I can define a color that's the same as my background and it just won't match if it's a PNG. Fine in most browsers, not IE. So I have to have _either_ transparency _or_ reasonable background color matching.
t ml)
Check out this page: (http://paralytic.buyclamsonline.com/comparison.h
The background color is #555577 and there are two square images filled with the same color (as per Photoshop.) They were saved as a 2 bit GIF and a 24 bit PNG with all the normal settings using the "Save For Web" function.
In Safari on the Mac, the images can't be seen. Same with OmniWeb. IE on the Mac has the PNG is slightly darker (and is obvious). With IE on the PC, the PNG is slightly lighter than the background and is still obvious.
Like I said, give me transparency or make it so I can make the PNG the same color as the background, but give me one of them!
This is way offtopic, but I'll bite.
We're going on and on as a country about just how crappy it is to live in other countries, with just cause.
But when did we get so damned coddled as a country that stopping our SUVs from getting through a street is the worst thing that can happen to us? I've been listening to some of the counter-protestors on my campus, and they seem to be the most thin-skinned reactionaries I have ever met. I'm not an avid anti-war person (though I oppose it), but I'd be embarrassed to be associated with group of people who can't think of anything more threatening to their daily lives than the possibility of blocked traffic.
The notion that the blocking of traffic endangers people through the blocking of emergency services is specious. Plenty of things block traffic a lot more often than protests do -- road work, parades, weather. Are those terrorism?
I haven't heard about this. Has it been on any news services?
GIFs rule! If my image is over a K, I don't want it!
When IE supports PNGs properly, I'll go all-PNG (which would tickle my turtle.)
So I use your five songs illegally in my movie, my movie makes ten million dollars in profit and my release of the soundtrack makes another five million (with your work!) You don't think $750,000 is a reasonable punishment?
Yes and probably not.
That was me who said Apple had invented firewire. I think we might be agreeing.
Uh, I think FreeBSD is UNIX, if it's a BSD. My understanding is that BSD code is UNIX and software actually derived from the AT&T sources is also UNIX. I'm sure I'm missing a lot of nuance and someone will point it out in great detail.
But sexual orientation is fair game. I like living in a progressive country.
I think it would just result in more efficient courts.
The maximum damages make sense if you think of them in the greater context. What if I start a company that sells bootleg copies DVDs? Or, what if I make a major motion picture and simply pull the soundtrack off the CDs in my library?
In both of those situations, a $150,000 punitive judgment would be fair in my eyes.
In this case, it's obviously preposterous.
Sledgehammer? They're using nuclear weapons!
I like the idea. It's akin to those "if you lived here, you'd be home by now" signs on the highway.
:-)
"If you had our software, this wouldn't be bugging you. Buy Spam-Proof Pro."
I think that's the intent of the lameness filter, but it just ends up being pretty lame.
Right. That was my point. See, I responded to his assertion that Apple had never invented anything with that link, which suggested that Apple had invented firewire. To get there, I read the link and saw what it menat. Then I thought about what he said and saw that the link countered his assertion. So I presented the link as evidence that Apple _had_, in fact invented something. So I posted it here. And to it you responded, but yoe seem to have missed one or two of the steps in that progression.
Dude, you're wrong all over the place.
p
FireWire: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,848866,00.as
ColorSync: Implementation is half the battle, but they didn't invent color matching. They made it work transparently.
QuickTime: QuickTime is more than just a codec. It's a time-based media framework that is unlike anything that came before it. Sorenson is just a piece of the puzzle, like M-JPEG and Cinepac.
How about network autodiscovery and physical networks that anyone could use? (AppleTalk and LocalTalk).
Or simple and obvious multiple monitors? Plug another video card in and get a bigger desktop. In 1987!
Perhaps you're blinded by the hatred you have for something that is pretty trivial in the scheme of things.
I think that for everyone, the fact that it's designed for developers is a drawback to usability. I typically think like a developer and when an OSS UI starts to suck, I clearly understand why. I still get mad, though. Even if I understand how and why it works and sucks, I still don't have to put up with it. That's my point.
I'm not sure what you point was, but I don't feel that developers need to change. They're doing what works for them. But, if they want to have their work appreciated on a larger scale or they want the unwashed masses of users not complain, they should consider investigating their practices.
(And I've more than once said "it works that way because I don't want to spend time to make it work any differently.")
I don't know about you, but when I'm writing code that other people are going to see, paid or not, I am extra anal about how it looks/runs. It bloody well better not have any bugs because I actually take pride in what I do. So, paid or not, I'm going to put a _lot_ of effort into making it right.
The thing that ought to keep open source software on track is the pride. If you're doing it because you like it (as everyone here is saying) then you ought to like it enough to do it right.
"Free software is about developers, not users."
And that's why it sucks to use.
The GIMP hardly can be called full-featured.
How about Fontographer? How about Freehand/Illustrator? I don't swing that way, but DreamWeaver or GoLive?
Final Cut Pro? Shake? Maya? Hell, iMovie.
Sorenson Squeeze?
Geez. Face it, sometimes quality software costs money. You can rattle your change and cackle while using the GIMP and I'll pay for Photoshop and actually be satisfied with my software.
One PC user couldn't read the webpage, another one couldn't read the article about the webpage. Sounds like it's the PC users who can't read. But I might be misreading it, having a Mac and all.
I've never heard of the band but I do go to CMU. As a matter of fact, my id used to be my EFNet nick. Small world.
Only the lower parts of the OS are open source. As a result, the other parts are binary form only and that is compiled for PPC.
No, but contracts can. If Apple has a contract with a spare parts reseller that tells them that they can't resell for certain uses, then they (Apple) can go after the source of the parts.
Come on, it's funny.