I like so many others, have tried, again and again, politely and impolitely, to get FF to focus on so many problems... Like the bookmarks editor...just hopeless Like the loss of control of privacy functions...
Yup. I tried to convince them that per-site script and cookie permissions need to be part of the core browser, and not require add-ons which increase bloat and cause compatibility problems... but no, they're too busy building useless address books that nobody wants, and trying to ram Ogg Theora down people's throats.
So when Chrome got per-site script and cookie controls, I switched.
While FP permits some useful constructs (like Ruby's blocks), writing everything as a FP is a pain in the ass.
Any programming paradigm is a pain in the ass when used exclusively.
Procedural programming, with no OO features or first class functions available? Absolute pain in the ass.
Pure object-oriented programming, where you're not allowed to write simple procedural code for (say) OpenGL, but are forced to turn it all into objects? Absolute pain in the ass.
By the time I had CookieSafe and NoScript installed to provide basic security, and Web Developer and Firebug installed for my developer tools, the whole thing started to get RAM-hungry and crashy.
The Firefox devs aren't interested in providing fine-grained security controls in the browser, so I switched to Chrome, which has all the security and developer functionality built in. The fact that the developer tools actually seemed to work as described (not my experience with Firebug) was an added bonus.
1. Valve's DRM isn't horribly invasive or system-destroying.
2. They do the right thing by having cheap prices on downloadable games--including $2.99 special offers.
3. They are now doing the right thing by supporting Mac and Linux, and by allowing your existing licenses to work with any platform. This is really key, because it means that people who have a PC just for gaming and a Mac or Linux box for everything else will be encouraged to switch to Mac or Linux entirely and drop Windows. If you had to re-buy all your games, that wouldn't happen.
4. If we all support Valve, it'll show that gaming on Mac and Linux can be viable, and maybe help break the stranglehold Microsoft has on PC gaming.
So I already spent $10 with them, and plan to support them more. Once Mac and Linux gaming takes off again, then we can start supporting people who offer DRM-free games.
The best way to fight piracy on the DS is to give us an easy way to store games on the device digitally. You'll probably want to pair this with a digital distribution scheme, which is fine, and gives you a nice place to ensure that we get free demos of all games.
I assume that's what they were trying to do with the DSi and DSiware. The trouble is, like Sony they've discovered that download-only games you can't sell second hand have a lower value than regular games, so the people who do pay for games (like me) aren't willing to pay as much for them. That in turn has meant that DSiware has been filled with crappy minigames.
To put numbers to it, If I can buy Zelda on the DS for $29.99 and sell it used for $20, you need to sell me the full Zelda as a download for less than $10. I don't think Nintendo are willing to do that, which means the digital distribution scheme is a non-starter.
While a lot of slashdotters support Software as a Service, very few, if any, would support Music as a Service.
Funny, I'm exactly the opposite.
I want to control when I get software upgrades, and not be reliant on someone for access to my data, so software as a service is extremely unappealing to me.
However, if I could get access to an infinite jukebox with a superset of my music collection for a monthly fee, I'd definitely go for that.
Use a dev license on it and write your own, or install someone else's code on it.
Section 7 of the developer license agreement prohibits developers from distributing their apps to other developers without using the iTunes app store. So apparently you can own your iPhone, or own control of whether you distribute your code, but not both.
Apple's not dictating what tools you may or may not use to develop on iPhone OS. Apple's dictating what tools you may use to develop software you wish to distribute through their distribution channel.
...which they claim is the only legal one. The license agreement explicitly prohibits distributing your software to other developers to install using their developer-enabled iPhones. (See section 7.)
So yeah, you can develop software, so long as you don't want to distribute it to anyone else.
I've got dozens of non-R1 DVDs of TV shows and movies which I couldn't simply buy or rent in the USA. But not everyone's willing to e-mail a friend in Finland or take a trip to England to get a legal copy of a movie or TV show; and often, if I can't buy it legally, I don't want to wait until I'm next overseas, and I end up 'pirating'.
The thing I hated about Oblivion was that when I leveled up a couple of times and went out to finally kick the asses of a bunch of bandits, they had all mysteriously leveled up too. Even the goddamn wolves had been collecting XP and turning into timber wolves.
(That and the giant scary flaming vagina portals to the evil land of blood. Was it designed by a bunch of gay men?)
If it could add the ability to manage the exception list while you are looking at the page (without diving into menus) the way NoScript does, then I would switch to chrome in a heartbeat.
It already has that. Small icons appear to the right of the entry bar when cookies or scripts are blocked. You can click the icon to turn on scripts or cookies for the domain.
They are also creating a problem for Opera, Linux distributions, and other minor browser vendors that can't afford the hefty license fees or the risk of being sued.
Browser vendors should just call the OS-supplied multimedia frameworks.
On OS X you don't need h.264 patent licenses, just call QuickTime. I'm assuming Windows provides h.264 decoder frameworks as well, if not then use QuickTime on Windows. For Linux, there's gstreamer etc.
There is no reason for the browser itself to have h.264 codecs in. That's as bad for performance as using Flash to play it back instead of native media frameworks; exactly the crap we're trying to avoid with HTML5.
Or, to look at it another way, Microsoft stay true to form and support proprietary standards which put open source competition at a disadvantage...
All Firefox needs to do is call the OS media framework for video decoding. There's no reason why the browser needs any codecs. They're just doing that out of a religious desire to push a format nobody wants or uses.
yum seems to address all of those rpm complaints of old
Yeah, it does when you first install it.
Then eventually you hit a circular dependency, or a package yum mysteriously won't upgrade, or RPM craps out its database, or you notice how incredibly goddamn slow yum is...
Slashdot Mirror
Yup. I tried to convince them that per-site script and cookie permissions need to be part of the core browser, and not require add-ons which increase bloat and cause compatibility problems... but no, they're too busy building useless address books that nobody wants, and trying to ram Ogg Theora down people's throats.
So when Chrome got per-site script and cookie controls, I switched.
There are any number of Java demos you can run on a JVM on pretty much any OS. Entire games, even--Java4K.
They fixed that. You can wildcard [*.]slashdot.org
That's when I dropped Firefox and switched to Chrome.
Here's what I wrote about it. You still need an adblocker, but cookie and script permissions are built-in.
Any programming paradigm is a pain in the ass when used exclusively.
Procedural programming, with no OO features or first class functions available? Absolute pain in the ass.
Pure object-oriented programming, where you're not allowed to write simple procedural code for (say) OpenGL, but are forced to turn it all into objects? Absolute pain in the ass.
Pick the paradigm that suits the problem.
Add-ons are why I quit Firefox.
By the time I had CookieSafe and NoScript installed to provide basic security, and Web Developer and Firebug installed for my developer tools, the whole thing started to get RAM-hungry and crashy.
The Firefox devs aren't interested in providing fine-grained security controls in the browser, so I switched to Chrome, which has all the security and developer functionality built in. The fact that the developer tools actually seemed to work as described (not my experience with Firebug) was an added bonus.
Holy crap, talk about a case of "Your mileage may vary".
I'm in the process of eliminating the last few OpenSuSE machines I have to worry about, because of the pain they've put me through.
1. Valve's DRM isn't horribly invasive or system-destroying.
2. They do the right thing by having cheap prices on downloadable games--including $2.99 special offers.
3. They are now doing the right thing by supporting Mac and Linux, and by allowing your existing licenses to work with any platform. This is really key, because it means that people who have a PC just for gaming and a Mac or Linux box for everything else will be encouraged to switch to Mac or Linux entirely and drop Windows. If you had to re-buy all your games, that wouldn't happen.
4. If we all support Valve, it'll show that gaming on Mac and Linux can be viable, and maybe help break the stranglehold Microsoft has on PC gaming.
So I already spent $10 with them, and plan to support them more. Once Mac and Linux gaming takes off again, then we can start supporting people who offer DRM-free games.
The entire review is apparently predicated on the idea that you'll control the thing from an iPod Touch or iPhone.
If you have an iPod Touch or iPhone, what the hell do you need this thing for?
Tell us what it's like to actually use the device itself.
Parakeets are tetrachromates, and mine love watching TV. Perhaps Sharp could offer a special parrot-friendly TV with UV pixels?
Or squant. The time is long overdue for squant support in televisions.
I assume that's what they were trying to do with the DSi and DSiware. The trouble is, like Sony they've discovered that download-only games you can't sell second hand have a lower value than regular games, so the people who do pay for games (like me) aren't willing to pay as much for them. That in turn has meant that DSiware has been filled with crappy minigames.
To put numbers to it, If I can buy Zelda on the DS for $29.99 and sell it used for $20, you need to sell me the full Zelda as a download for less than $10. I don't think Nintendo are willing to do that, which means the digital distribution scheme is a non-starter.
Funny, I'm exactly the opposite.
I want to control when I get software upgrades, and not be reliant on someone for access to my data, so software as a service is extremely unappealing to me.
However, if I could get access to an infinite jukebox with a superset of my music collection for a monthly fee, I'd definitely go for that.
Section 7 of the developer license agreement prohibits developers from distributing their apps to other developers without using the iTunes app store. So apparently you can own your iPhone, or own control of whether you distribute your code, but not both.
So yeah, you can develop software, so long as you don't want to distribute it to anyone else.
It doesn't. The only occurrences of "theft" I found in the cited law were the use of the word in the titles of bills passed to amend the law.
That is, while politicians may have called it "theft", the actual law itself doesn't use the word.
You must have very mainstream tastes.
Want to watch Nothing Lasts Forever , Leningrad Cowboys Go America , The League of Gentlemen's Apocalypse , or The Bed Sitting Room ? All reasonably well-known and popular cult movies with English-language soundtracks, but you can't get any of them in Region 1.
I've got dozens of non-R1 DVDs of TV shows and movies which I couldn't simply buy or rent in the USA. But not everyone's willing to e-mail a friend in Finland or take a trip to England to get a legal copy of a movie or TV show; and often, if I can't buy it legally, I don't want to wait until I'm next overseas, and I end up 'pirating'.
The thing I hated about Oblivion was that when I leveled up a couple of times and went out to finally kick the asses of a bunch of bandits, they had all mysteriously leveled up too. Even the goddamn wolves had been collecting XP and turning into timber wolves.
(That and the giant scary flaming vagina portals to the evil land of blood. Was it designed by a bunch of gay men?)
It already has that. Small icons appear to the right of the entry bar when cookies or scripts are blocked. You can click the icon to turn on scripts or cookies for the domain.
More info and screenshots at my web site.
No, he didn't even do that.
The Apple viewpoint is "If we act as gatekeepers to the iPhone and iPad app store, we can get 30% from every sale."
Everything Steve Jobs said is just a convenient excuse.
You can buy Dr Who from the iTunes store.
Sure, it's not a perfect solution because there's DRM, but I'm willing to put up with that for now. I don't tend to re-watch TV anyway.
Or rather, cut the satellite subscription.
If it's available via Netflix, I watch it that way.
Otherwise, I check iTunes and the PSN video store.
Then as a last resort, BitTorrent.
It's surprising how many companies don't want to sell me their shows, but everything I really care about is available somehow.
I tend not to use Hulu because they've made it a PITA to watch it on my TV.
Browser vendors should just call the OS-supplied multimedia frameworks.
On OS X you don't need h.264 patent licenses, just call QuickTime. I'm assuming Windows provides h.264 decoder frameworks as well, if not then use QuickTime on Windows. For Linux, there's gstreamer etc.
There is no reason for the browser itself to have h.264 codecs in. That's as bad for performance as using Flash to play it back instead of native media frameworks; exactly the crap we're trying to avoid with HTML5.
All Firefox needs to do is call the OS media framework for video decoding. There's no reason why the browser needs any codecs. They're just doing that out of a religious desire to push a format nobody wants or uses.
Yeah, it does when you first install it.
Then eventually you hit a circular dependency, or a package yum mysteriously won't upgrade, or RPM craps out its database, or you notice how incredibly goddamn slow yum is...