That is not interresting, that is to be expected. Because it has already come out that they explicitly wanted to know about the patents and Google, it was even suggested it was a dealbreaker if it wasn't something they could sue over.
Re:Oracle is doing everything they can to fuck up
on
Oracle To Monetize Java VM
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
"it might be forked pretty soon, so nothing of value would be lost."
It has for example been revealed that Oracle explicitly asked about Google and patents before the deal and supposedly didn't even want the deal if it wasn't useful.
First we had webdevelopers who wanted to better seperate content, behaviour and style. And they started to implement that, they asked the browser developers to make such an API because it would be a lot faster if browser did that. The browserdevelopers didn't do so, because it would be slow. Then people create frameworks which did that too and a lot of people started using it. Then browserdevelopers said, let's make a spec and implement it, if people are using it anyway, might as well try to make it as fast as possible.
My problem with GA is that they add so many cookies.
For all the different domains (with and without www, etc.) seperate cookies and they are large.
This slows down the browser when doing requests to the server, because uploading large cookies takes more time because of the upload-/-download ratio of a lot of customer/business connections.
Slashdot Mirror
Vala ?
I meant to write: any way
(And it took years to get it to perform in anyway sane).
That is the whole problem: if you do it right
I see to much shitty programming though.
That is not interresting, that is to be expected. Because it has already come out that they explicitly wanted to know about the patents and Google, it was even suggested it was a dealbreaker if it wasn't something they could sue over.
"it might be forked pretty soon, so nothing of value would be lost."
compatibility ?
It has for example been revealed that Oracle explicitly asked about Google and patents before the deal and supposedly didn't even want the deal if it wasn't useful.
Only thing I know of is Vala.
it doesn't ? that would be kind of defeat the reason of using it then.
The summary said, doing what is similair to the apache-module.
"if JQuery were integrated with the browsers"
if you mean, if features from jquery (and similair frameworks) were included in the browser, then that has already happend.
It is called the document.querySelectorAll
http://www.w3.org/TR/selectors-api/
First we had webdevelopers who wanted to better seperate content, behaviour and style. And they started to implement that, they asked the browser developers to make such an API because it would be a lot faster if browser did that. The browserdevelopers didn't do so, because it would be slow. Then people create frameworks which did that too and a lot of people started using it. Then browserdevelopers said, let's make a spec and implement it, if people are using it anyway, might as well try to make it as fast as possible.
I agree, that free service isn't that fast and the cache-time isn't very long. The cache time in the HTTP-headers is set to just 1 hour, please, why ?
My problem with GA is that they add so many cookies.
For all the different domains (with and without www, etc.) seperate cookies and they are large.
This slows down the browser when doing requests to the server, because uploading large cookies takes more time because of the upload-/-download ratio of a lot of customer/business connections.
Only difference is, Steve Jobs can command everyone in his company to work on it. While Shuttleworth needs the community to help him.
I think the problem with DVD is the business model, not so much the technology.
Actually I know for a fact RDP can do just apps*, just is Microsoft does not want you to that because of their licensing/business model.
http://rdesktop.sf.net/ and seamless rdp
JavaScript is much, much closer related to LISP than Basic.
http://www.crockford.com/javascript/javascript.html
It just has C-like syntax, that is all.
Most are still using nothing, wep, wpa or the wrong wpa-2 options. :-(
Most people call it a thinclient.
Their is no IE9 for XP and Chrome and FF even have hardware acceleration on XP. XP is still 60% of all windows users.
Firefox 4 will come with a MSI-installer, only Microsoft has that now.
Also remember Firefox 4 will come with a MSI-installer, only Microsoft has that now.
The home users on Windows Vista and 7 who don't understand what a browser is and just use what is already installed when the update for IE9 comes out.
They will get a shock with the new interface though.
On english speaking sites, Asian visitors have just as up to date browsers like everywhere else, sometimes more.
I'm afraid IE9 will be like IE6 all over again. :-(
It looks like it will, when IE9 has been released (which will be last, this round), it will support everything the other have supported for years.