If IE11 is released before January 2015 it should be available for Windows 7. That's what differentiates "Mainstream Support" from "Extended Support"; new features. http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?p1=14482
Google too actually. Chrome is only available for Android 4.0+. So basically no company that makes an OS and web browser backports their browser to older versions of their OS.
Provided IE11 is released while Windows 8 is in "Mainstream Support" (new features) and before it moves to "Extended Support" (security fixes only), then Windows 8 will be enough. As Windows 8 will be in Mainstream Support until September 2018, safe bet to say Windows 8 will get IE11. http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?p1=16799
Chrome dropping H.264 was announced over two years ago with absolutely no follow up. It's entirely possible they just changed their minds on the whole thing.
Doesn't Google/YouTube have to still produce H.264 though? Unless you're assuming YouTube will go only VP8. If that's the case then everyone else will have the ability to play it so they can watch their cat videos. I'm not defending their actions, just don't see how YouTube is any different from any other content creator in your scenario.
Google's aim here is to make life difficult for competitors such as Amazon and the Chinese Android clone makers (not that these will care). This allows them to interfere with the free market for their own benefit. For programmers reading Slashdot, that means that, instead of being four or more potential developers of mobile software you can work for, Amazon, Google, Apple and the Chinese, there may well only be two: Apple and Google. With the possible exception of Jolla and Ubuntu, there is almost nobody else in the market who could consider competing. For people buying mobile phones would mean that, instead of having widespread choice from different vendors, everything would go through Google or Apple.
As you said the Chinese knock-offs won't care, and there is no such thing as an Amazon phone, so how exactly would this make anything different?
Slashdot Mirror
If IE11 is released before January 2015 it should be available for Windows 7. That's what differentiates "Mainstream Support" from "Extended Support"; new features. http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?p1=14482
Who also encodes in mp4 so it's moot?
Google too actually. Chrome is only available for Android 4.0+.
So basically no company that makes an OS and web browser backports their browser to older versions of their OS.
Provided IE11 is released while Windows 8 is in "Mainstream Support" (new features) and before it moves to "Extended Support" (security fixes only), then Windows 8 will be enough. As Windows 8 will be in Mainstream Support until September 2018, safe bet to say Windows 8 will get IE11. http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?p1=16799
Chrome dropping H.264 was announced over two years ago with absolutely no follow up. It's entirely possible they just changed their minds on the whole thing.
Doesn't Google/YouTube have to still produce H.264 though? Unless you're assuming YouTube will go only VP8. If that's the case then everyone else will have the ability to play it so they can watch their cat videos.
I'm not defending their actions, just don't see how YouTube is any different from any other content creator in your scenario.
Yes, IE10 shows "Mozilla", the new thing is that IE11 shows "like Gecko"
What sort of CSS/HTML issues are you having with new versions of IE? This isn't IE6 anymore.
Oh yes, Firefox 137 sounds much better!
And why do you want it to 'force stop'? You do know Android is smart enough to free up RAM and the like when needed, right?
That implies the user knows which application from Windows Update caused all the unwanted additions.
Good thing the UIs aren't 100% the same then.
Yet when developers add features, it's called bloat. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
As sited earlier, there is a United Nations Security Council Resolution saying DPRK can't conduct nuclear tests. Is there a resolution that applies to the U.S.?
How are DRM and cross-platform mutually exclusive?
Because then it would be behind a paywall.
Or are you saying it shouldn't be that EITHER and it should be 100% free because you're entitled?
Depending on ones definition of 'bloatware' the only way Canonical would satisfy them is if it came with nothing installed at all.
So the patent system should be fixed to bring it back to that theory, not removed because of abusive practices.
A web browser that cherry picks which W3C standards to implement? I think you should call it "Internet Explorer".
So you're suggesting Firefox doesn't follow the W3C/Whatwg standard?
I'm sure if it were spun as "iOS refuses to follow standards for <video> tag" you'd be up in arms.
...and already the same old discussion of "I use {inset DE} therefore it is the only good one and all others are dumb" has started.
Google's aim here is to make life difficult for competitors such as Amazon and the Chinese Android clone makers (not that these will care). This allows them to interfere with the free market for their own benefit. For programmers reading Slashdot, that means that, instead of being four or more potential developers of mobile software you can work for, Amazon, Google, Apple and the Chinese, there may well only be two: Apple and Google. With the possible exception of Jolla and Ubuntu, there is almost nobody else in the market who could consider competing. For people buying mobile phones would mean that, instead of having widespread choice from different vendors, everything would go through Google or Apple.
As you said the Chinese knock-offs won't care, and there is no such thing as an Amazon phone, so how exactly would this make anything different?
Relative to myself, 'other' would include you. So yes it does depend on your (and others) definition of evil.
Isn't that what PPAs are for? I agree not as elegant as it should be, but it's also irrelevant to Unity.
I know, right? What was GNOME thinking with Shell?