Dude, when one sits at home on the weekend, writing fiction (with utterly shite grammar btw) involving the iPhone, beating women and rape, one knows that it's time to get some help, get out of that basement and get a life.
I may be wrong, but a class library isn't a complete implementation. If GNU Classpath was an incomplete reimplementation of the class libraries, compiler, VM etc., then they might have reason to worry.
You'd think a paralegal like PJ would actually do her research. Even I know the answer to the question "how can anyone be sued for anything like this?" - it's because the patent grant doesn't apply to random implementations, like Dalvik!
Care to provide a link to this post? I've just looked through the entire comment stream, and all I can find is this review: New iPhone 4..., which I have already seen and read.
It's possibly down to the graphics chipset I've got in this machine (like yours, only no-frills Intel). However that doesn't explain why video decode in Windows Media Player, or VLC results in normal CPU utilisation and the same decoding done in Flash results in complete CPU over-utilisation, though.
I'd ask Adobe why my experience is so different to yours, however they deleted my account and bug report after I asked politely (in plain English) why they hadn't at least acknowledged my bug report four months after it was created... and I haven't been able to create another account from this IP address since.
Please point me to the bit where I missed jcr referencing a press couference, because I cannot see it. Evidence and pointing to "Anandtech's findings" are not one and the same.
I use both extensions (Flashblock and AdBlock) with Chrome for exactly that reason. If I had the choice, I'd not have Flash installed on my desktop, alas there are some things that it is an absolute must for at the moment (like BBC iPlayer). I refuse to have it installed on my phone, though; Adobe's security track record is too poor for my liking, so my Samsung Galaxy S shall have to remain without that particular attack vector.
I'm not quite sure what this has to do with Firefox though, but since I don't use it, I guess that is moot.;)
My use of Flash is limited: video only (YouTube, BBC iPlayer, Channel 4's 4oD and the occasional video review), and much of that is H.264. Flashblock keeps all the other crap away from me, thankfully. Now, you mention poor configuration, and I guess that's certainly a possibility: I wasn't aware that one needed to configure Flash for good performance. Unless you're talking about the minimal settings dialogue, wherein you can enable hardware acceleration... if that is what you're referring to, well, it's enabled and doesn't make much of a difference (~5% less CPU utilisation).
You have a seriously messed up computer. I'm on my work machine (2 gigs of ram, Windows 7 Flash 10.1 - and its an Dell Optiplex 745 with a 2 core Core 2 duo running at 2.4 GHz) and hulu in hd mode uses 15% of the cpu. My machine is nothing to brag about either.
Then countless others users on Adobe's bug tracking system also have messed up computers. And considering that my tests were based on a fresh install of Windows 7 with lots of unnecessary crap disabled, I'm wondering whether you're either very lucky or whether Hulu (which I don't use) have found a way to stop Flash video decode taking up massive amount of resources...
I can understand Apple not wanting Flash in their walled-garden. Adobe can't even optimise the desktop player (on Windows no less) so that it doesn't chew up all/close to all available CPU cycles. I'm guessing the reason it's not even a choice left to the user is that Apple don't want to field the inevitable complaints (they've got enough of their own to deal with, heh). That said, users can and do shoot themselves in the foot all the time, so I agree with you: there should be a choice, and that choice should not be Apple's.
I wonder how many people actually want Flash on their phones. I mean, Adobe have had more than a few years to optimise their player for the biggest sector of their market: the desktop, and they've failed completely. Even on my fairly beefy (Windows 7) desktop with gigs of ram and an abundance of free CPU cycles (read: 99% idle, only Chrome with flash running), the latest flash player chews up CPU like no man's business. (And yes, I've tried the betas and pre-releases, and they're just as bad...)
Perhaps I'm wrong in thinking that only a minority of people would want flash on their phones, or perhaps Adobe has stepped it up a gear and actually optimised flash player enough so that it won't drain down a handset's battery in a very short space of time. But considering that they often refuse to even comment on bug reports regarding performance (or a complete lack thereof), I'd be surprised if they have.
Android OS may be beating iPhone OS but that's Android OS on 100 different Android phones with all different specs.
It's much harder to develop for Android because you have to worry about all the difference specs.
I don't develop apps for either platform, however I know people who do and they tell me it's not that difficult. The biggest hurdle seems to be differing screen sizes, which a smart programmer can code around. Of course, if app programmers have no grasp of portable programming, it will be a lot harder to target multiple handsets, so point taken. There's also the fact that manufacturers like Sony Ericsson, for example, are releasing new handsets with Android 1.6 and no updates in sight. There's really no excuse for that, and will only hurt their profits and annoy users and developers alike.
iOS 4 is still the #1 OS on iPhones and while sure iOS 4 runs on the iPhone 3G it's mainly running on iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4 which have similar hardware. So you don't have to worry about your app running horrible on certain phones.
Redundant, surely. Especially considering that there isn't a flurry of users rushing to put some other OS on their iPhones. Sure you could bring up the hardware using Linux or some other embedded OS, but without all the drivers and baseband software, it's just an expensive brick.
And btw, do you actually know anyone who owns an iPhone 3 or 3GS with iOS 4 on it that is actually happy I know quite a few, and every single one wishes they had not upgraded. The words 'dog', 'slow' and the phrase "I can't wait 'til my contract is up" spring to mind.
Hate to burst your bubble, but the Samsung Galaxy S has exactly the same problem: a single touch to the bottom right of the handset will reduce the reported signal from five bars to one. Shame really, as that's the only problem I've had with this excellent smartphone.
I know I just just skip past this comment, but I do wonder why so many people on here seem to think being raped is funny. You might think the guy did wrong; you might also think that justice has really been served, and hey that's your right, we're all allowed an opinion. But he's not some big-in-the-game criminal that destoryed people's lives, so I really fail to see why joking that he should keep his arse to the wall is at all funnny.
Now that he's been sentenced, does this mean that more accirate details about the case will finally come to light? A lot of what I've read seemed to be mostly hearsay with hard facts hard to come by...
Exactly. Labour was hell-bent on keeping ContactPoint, just like every other IT project that was leaking money like a sieve.
Note that the coalition aren't scrapping ContactPoint entirely, unless reports that I've read are incorrect. They're just scaling it down so that only the children that they deem to be "at risk" are on it.
No, that's not quite how the government works in the UK. It's more like this: Labour party gets power, tries to undo what it sees as excessive cuts made by the Conservatives in previous government, and spends more than it should. Or like now, the Conservatives get into power and cut the country to oblivion, because the previous Labour government spent beyond its means.
If you actually look at voting records, I'm quite sure you'll see that both parties are in favour of Big Brother, so don't be fooled. The treasury are just looking to make as many cuts as possible it seems, regardless of whether they're important (front-line services like the police, or cutting protection for sufferers of domestic violence) or not, as is the case with ContactPoint.
I've had similar things happen with my own works that I've licensed under either the CC or similar media-suited licenses. It's very annoying. Even worse, it's always the big companies that could actually afford a to pay for whatever rights necessary that dont, in my experience. Very sloppy business practices...
But what can you do? You have a choice: protect your rights (while you still have them!), ot let corporations take the piss. Pretty simple, really.
That's actually the only thing I miss about Firefox; the NoScript add-on. Chrome has extensions of course, and now also resource blocking. But being able to control which foreign scripts your browser executes is very nifty and, of course, helps with security (NoScript really should bbe mandatory for Windows Firefox users;-)).
I'd be surprised if, in a year or so, there isn't such an extension for Chrome, though.
Slashdot Mirror
Dude, when one sits at home on the weekend, writing fiction (with utterly shite grammar btw) involving the iPhone, beating women and rape, one knows that it's time to get some help, get out of that basement and get a life.
I may be wrong, but a class library isn't a complete implementation. If GNU Classpath was an incomplete reimplementation of the class libraries, compiler, VM etc., then they might have reason to worry.
You'd think a paralegal like PJ would actually do her research. Even I know the answer to the question "how can anyone be sued for anything like this?" - it's because the patent grant doesn't apply to random implementations, like Dalvik!
What are you insinuating, that AC is some dumb American who doesn't know the meaning of the word 'sodomy'?
Don't forget Guantanamo Bay. Didn't he win the election in part thanks to those promises to shut that hellhole down?
Care to provide a link to this post? I've just looked through the entire comment stream, and all I can find is this review: New iPhone 4..., which I have already seen and read.
It's possibly down to the graphics chipset I've got in this machine (like yours, only no-frills Intel). However that doesn't explain why video decode in Windows Media Player, or VLC results in normal CPU utilisation and the same decoding done in Flash results in complete CPU over-utilisation, though.
I'd ask Adobe why my experience is so different to yours, however they deleted my account and bug report after I asked politely (in plain English) why they hadn't at least acknowledged my bug report four months after it was created... and I haven't been able to create another account from this IP address since.
Please point me to the bit where I missed jcr referencing a press couference, because I cannot see it. Evidence and pointing to "Anandtech's findings" are not one and the same.
I use both extensions (Flashblock and AdBlock) with Chrome for exactly that reason. If I had the choice, I'd not have Flash installed on my desktop, alas there are some things that it is an absolute must for at the moment (like BBC iPlayer). I refuse to have it installed on my phone, though; Adobe's security track record is too poor for my liking, so my Samsung Galaxy S shall have to remain without that particular attack vector.
I'm not quite sure what this has to do with Firefox though, but since I don't use it, I guess that is moot. ;)
My use of Flash is limited: video only (YouTube, BBC iPlayer, Channel 4's 4oD and the occasional video review), and much of that is H.264. Flashblock keeps all the other crap away from me, thankfully. Now, you mention poor configuration, and I guess that's certainly a possibility: I wasn't aware that one needed to configure Flash for good performance. Unless you're talking about the minimal settings dialogue, wherein you can enable hardware acceleration... if that is what you're referring to, well, it's enabled and doesn't make much of a difference (~5% less CPU utilisation).
You have a seriously messed up computer. I'm on my work machine (2 gigs of ram, Windows 7 Flash 10.1 - and its an Dell Optiplex 745 with a 2 core Core 2 duo running at 2.4 GHz) and hulu in hd mode uses 15% of the cpu. My machine is nothing to brag about either.
Then countless others users on Adobe's bug tracking system also have messed up computers. And considering that my tests were based on a fresh install of Windows 7 with lots of unnecessary crap disabled, I'm wondering whether you're either very lucky or whether Hulu (which I don't use) have found a way to stop Flash video decode taking up massive amount of resources...
Just because the vocal minority wants Flash on their Android phones, does not mean that we all do...
I for one will be removing anything Flash-related should it be pushed in my next firmware update.
I can understand Apple not wanting Flash in their walled-garden. Adobe can't even optimise the desktop player (on Windows no less) so that it doesn't chew up all/close to all available CPU cycles. I'm guessing the reason it's not even a choice left to the user is that Apple don't want to field the inevitable complaints (they've got enough of their own to deal with, heh). That said, users can and do shoot themselves in the foot all the time, so I agree with you: there should be a choice, and that choice should not be Apple's.
I wonder how many people actually want Flash on their phones. I mean, Adobe have had more than a few years to optimise their player for the biggest sector of their market: the desktop, and they've failed completely. Even on my fairly beefy (Windows 7) desktop with gigs of ram and an abundance of free CPU cycles (read: 99% idle, only Chrome with flash running), the latest flash player chews up CPU like no man's business. (And yes, I've tried the betas and pre-releases, and they're just as bad...)
Perhaps I'm wrong in thinking that only a minority of people would want flash on their phones, or perhaps Adobe has stepped it up a gear and actually optimised flash player enough so that it won't drain down a handset's battery in a very short space of time. But considering that they often refuse to even comment on bug reports regarding performance (or a complete lack thereof), I'd be surprised if they have.
You're funny.
Android OS may be beating iPhone OS but that's Android OS on 100 different Android phones with all different specs. It's much harder to develop for Android because you have to worry about all the difference specs.
I don't develop apps for either platform, however I know people who do and they tell me it's not that difficult. The biggest hurdle seems to be differing screen sizes, which a smart programmer can code around. Of course, if app programmers have no grasp of portable programming, it will be a lot harder to target multiple handsets, so point taken. There's also the fact that manufacturers like Sony Ericsson, for example, are releasing new handsets with Android 1.6 and no updates in sight. There's really no excuse for that, and will only hurt their profits and annoy users and developers alike.
iOS 4 is still the #1 OS on iPhones and while sure iOS 4 runs on the iPhone 3G it's mainly running on iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4 which have similar hardware. So you don't have to worry about your app running horrible on certain phones.
Redundant, surely. Especially considering that there isn't a flurry of users rushing to put some other OS on their iPhones. Sure you could bring up the hardware using Linux or some other embedded OS, but without all the drivers and baseband software, it's just an expensive brick.
And btw, do you actually know anyone who owns an iPhone 3 or 3GS with iOS 4 on it that is actually happy I know quite a few, and every single one wishes they had not upgraded. The words 'dog', 'slow' and the phrase "I can't wait 'til my contract is up" spring to mind.
Er, pot, kettle? You didn't post any evidence to back up your claims either...
Hate to burst your bubble, but the Samsung Galaxy S has exactly the same problem: a single touch to the bottom right of the handset will reduce the reported signal from five bars to one. Shame really, as that's the only problem I've had with this excellent smartphone.
Thanks! I somehow managed to miss this one at the time.
I know I just just skip past this comment, but I do wonder why so many people on here seem to think being raped is funny. You might think the guy did wrong; you might also think that justice has really been served, and hey that's your right, we're all allowed an opinion. But he's not some big-in-the-game criminal that destoryed people's lives, so I really fail to see why joking that he should keep his arse to the wall is at all funnny.
Now that he's been sentenced, does this mean that more accirate details about the case will finally come to light? A lot of what I've read seemed to be mostly hearsay with hard facts hard to come by...
Exactly. Labour was hell-bent on keeping ContactPoint, just like every other IT project that was leaking money like a sieve.
Note that the coalition aren't scrapping ContactPoint entirely, unless reports that I've read are incorrect. They're just scaling it down so that only the children that they deem to be "at risk" are on it.
No, that's not quite how the government works in the UK. It's more like this: Labour party gets power, tries to undo what it sees as excessive cuts made by the Conservatives in previous government, and spends more than it should. Or like now, the Conservatives get into power and cut the country to oblivion, because the previous Labour government spent beyond its means.
If you actually look at voting records, I'm quite sure you'll see that both parties are in favour of Big Brother, so don't be fooled. The treasury are just looking to make as many cuts as possible it seems, regardless of whether they're important (front-line services like the police, or cutting protection for sufferers of domestic violence) or not, as is the case with ContactPoint.
Virgin aren't picky... ;)
Which is a little strange considering the amount of complaints they've been getting recently.
I've had similar things happen with my own works that I've licensed under either the CC or similar media-suited licenses. It's very annoying. Even worse, it's always the big companies that could actually afford a to pay for whatever rights necessary that dont, in my experience. Very sloppy business practices...
But what can you do? You have a choice: protect your rights (while you still have them!), ot let corporations take the piss. Pretty simple, really.
That's actually the only thing I miss about Firefox; the NoScript add-on. Chrome has extensions of course, and now also resource blocking. But being able to control which foreign scripts your browser executes is very nifty and, of course, helps with security (NoScript really should bbe mandatory for Windows Firefox users ;-)).
I'd be surprised if, in a year or so, there isn't such an extension for Chrome, though.