Filtering software is good.
Mandatory filtering software is bad.
If you (as an adult, fully capable of making your own choices in life) are not allowed to access something, be it filterred or shut down by law, then it is a restriction of your freedom. (If that's important to you.)
If you (as an adult/parent) choose for you and your dependants to not access something, that is a use of your freedom. (If that's important to you.)
Yes, mozilla definitely needs to grow ui for these hidden features, but in time that should come.
It would be nice to get better granularity even than that, tho.
Someone mentioned that some other browser will let you disable "window.open" except on mouse click, which would be cool, as well as the possibility to even disable new window openning at all.
Certainly, the CPU requirements for both seem about equal. Probably the biggest CPU hog you've got is all of the flashy visuals from Windows Media Player being transferred across your bus - which WILL cause problems with your sound card
I don't think so. Two years ago at least, playing wma vs mp3 using winamp (no visualization running), wma always took more cpu time. What's more, for my cheap (free) 90 MHz Pentium laptop I had to downsample the wma for it to run, but the mp3's ran fine. (probably automatically dropping bits)
Now they've probably improved the codec somewhat, but since when have Microsoft products become more efficient over time?
Can you link me to a compiler comparison newer than this one? (dec 98)
The author concludes that:
GCC (ver 2.8.0) is better than Borland 5.02 and Symantec 7.5 (the worst); is comparable to Watcom 10 and 11 and is worst than Intel 2.4 and Microsoft 5.0.
(plus there's the differen't color "spots" that produce the color that you see)
Right, I'm comparing these spots to the pixels on a LCD. There's a finite number of them, in a fixed location, with a fixed size. The difference is that they're smaller, more numerous, and never correspond to exactly one pixel.
I do understand how cheap bitmap scaling works, but it was kind of you to explain.
BTW, yes you can tell it to use a smaller central portion, rather than scaling or interpolating, but then you don't use the entire display.
Ah, well the comments here made it sound like that was no longer being given as an option. thx
I can see somebody putting this in a cable modem, but the main problem (as I see it) is that then the device has to look at the entire packet before sending it off. Right now, routers just look at the header, figure out which path to send it on (only seeing ip addresses, btw) and go, which is much faster.
Firewalls afaik, also only look at the header most of the time, but there's probly exceptions to this.
Technically speaking, doesn't a CRT basically do the same thing?
I mean sure, the "pixels" are a lot smaller, and it's done with analog hardware, but it's still the same thing, ain't it? So just wait for lcd res to go waaay up!
Can you still tell the display to just use a smaller, centerred portion of the display?
Ok, so that part is useless now. Programs are still written for flat, 32-bit addressing on intel x86 processors tho. Most of the code generation & optimizations should still be useful for a while. (Until everything goes to 64-bit, if ever...)
Then again, maybe not... Considering the major changes in the x86 architecture, how *does* Watcom compare to modern compilers?
One attribute of geeks that I have noticed, is that they cannot sit through a movie without picking the plot to pieces and pedantically attacking every slight deviation from reality. I have nothing in particular against this, when applied to movies that are genuinely bad, such as "Austin Powers 2", but people who apply it to all movies really get up my nose.
How can you make fun of Austin Powers 2? I mean sure it was bad, but they specifically say "don't worry about the technicalities, just sit back and have fun"! If a movies says "this is not supposed to be realistic," how can you pick on it for not being realistic?!
Yeah it's different. He wants to have a fingerprint on it, right? Biometrics!
And btw, with regards to the terrorist attack, if the airports check your fingerprints (for all passengers, which would suck) and match that against the card/national database, you would know for certain who was on the plane. They have already found some of the people who were supposedly on the planes alive and well.
I started my own game (just to check out weapons & such) on a P3 600 / 256MB / Radeon SDR / W2k. Ran well, didn't impress me. "Sprint" is a good idea, tho.
Maybe your problem is network or drivers? (or WinME, but could it be that bad?)
So is there any quantitative way to measure the speed difference? Or is everyone just gonna argue back and forth with "My language seems faster than yours!"?
Any time that you rewrite 100% of the product, you can expect the new version to be slower, more infested with bugs, and just "feel" worse than the older version which has been tended for many years.
I disagree, sure there'll be more bugs (more new code), but in fact a complete rewrite should in the end be faster and cleaner. If they somehow made the old Navigator code compliant with the standards, it would be slow nasty spagetti code. A rewrite lets you untange that mess. If it feels worse, maybe you need a different chrome?
The first time I saw the "Deeply Nested Tables" demo, I was shocked! Mozilla is MUCH faster than 4.6 laying out tables alone.
Why should we increase our support of Israel ten-fold? So that we can get attacked again? It's high time we realize the we are vulnerable, and will always be vulnerable as long as we maintain an open society. Does that mean that we shouldn't respond to this latest attack? Of course not. But at the same time, we should realize that our foreign policy is literally driving large numbers of people into suicidal frenzys!
So you propose that we show the world that terrorism is a viable way to control the United States' foreign policy?
Personally, I don't know what should be done, but whatever is done will send a message, and those in charge must carefully consider what message they want to send and what other consequences there are.
You can't eat mp3s, you can't pay your rent with mp3s.
If you could "replicate" anything in the real world, the economy would collapse because no one would buy anything, but people could just make their own food, so you wouldn't *need* to buy anything. (except real estate & electricity/raw materials for replicator, unless that's out of the air)
I suspect the results would be different with Windows' less efficient menu system. (Yes, I use windows) And personally, it sometimes takes me a minute to *locate* my mouse, let alone move my hand to it;)
Slashdot Mirror
Filtering software is good.
Mandatory filtering software is bad.
If you (as an adult, fully capable of making your own choices in life) are not allowed to access something, be it filterred or shut down by law, then it is a restriction of your freedom. (If that's important to you.)
If you (as an adult/parent) choose for you and your dependants to not access something, that is a use of your freedom. (If that's important to you.)
Yes, mozilla definitely needs to grow ui for these hidden features, but in time that should come.
It would be nice to get better granularity even than that, tho.
Someone mentioned that some other browser will let you disable "window.open" except on mouse click, which would be cool, as well as the possibility to even disable new window openning at all.
Certainly, the CPU requirements for both seem about equal. Probably the biggest CPU hog you've got is all of the flashy visuals from Windows Media Player being transferred across your bus - which WILL cause problems with your sound card
I don't think so. Two years ago at least, playing wma vs mp3 using winamp (no visualization running), wma always took more cpu time. What's more, for my cheap (free) 90 MHz Pentium laptop I had to downsample the wma for it to run, but the mp3's ran fine. (probably automatically dropping bits)
Now they've probably improved the codec somewhat, but since when have Microsoft products become more efficient over time?
Can you link me to a compiler comparison newer than this one? (dec 98)
The author concludes that:
GCC (ver 2.8.0) is better than Borland 5.02 and Symantec 7.5 (the worst); is comparable to Watcom 10 and 11 and is worst than Intel 2.4 and Microsoft 5.0.
Woah, nifty. I retract my objection!
:P I took half of the CCNA classes & got free books before I foolishly graduated.)
(I am familiar with the OSI model, it's just been a while.
(plus there's the differen't color "spots" that produce the color that you see)
Right, I'm comparing these spots to the pixels on a LCD. There's a finite number of them, in a fixed location, with a fixed size. The difference is that they're smaller, more numerous, and never correspond to exactly one pixel.
I do understand how cheap bitmap scaling works, but it was kind of you to explain.
BTW, yes you can tell it to use a smaller central portion, rather than scaling or interpolating, but then you don't use the entire display.
Ah, well the comments here made it sound like that was no longer being given as an option. thx
I can see somebody putting this in a cable modem, but the main problem (as I see it) is that then the device has to look at the entire packet before sending it off. Right now, routers just look at the header, figure out which path to send it on (only seeing ip addresses, btw) and go, which is much faster.
Firewalls afaik, also only look at the header most of the time, but there's probly exceptions to this.
Technically speaking, doesn't a CRT basically do the same thing?
I mean sure, the "pixels" are a lot smaller, and it's done with analog hardware, but it's still the same thing, ain't it? So just wait for lcd res to go waaay up!
Can you still tell the display to just use a smaller, centerred portion of the display?
Ok, so that part is useless now. Programs are still written for flat, 32-bit addressing on intel x86 processors tho. Most of the code generation & optimizations should still be useful for a while. (Until everything goes to 64-bit, if ever...)
Then again, maybe not... Considering the major changes in the x86 architecture, how *does* Watcom compare to modern compilers?
Has nobody used the name "MINE"?
Seems obviously symetrical to WINE...
One attribute of geeks that I have noticed, is that they cannot sit through a movie without picking the plot to pieces and pedantically attacking every slight deviation from reality. I have nothing in particular against this, when applied to movies that are genuinely bad, such as "Austin Powers 2", but people who apply it to all movies really get up my nose.
How can you make fun of Austin Powers 2? I mean sure it was bad, but they specifically say "don't worry about the technicalities, just sit back and have fun"! If a movies says "this is not supposed to be realistic," how can you pick on it for not being realistic?!
How well does this handle disasters?
;)
If a house catches on fire, would this make it harder to put out?
If there's an earthquake or something that damages pipes, would this make a fire more likely?
How much hydrogen needs to be stored, and what are the risks of that? (assuming you don't line your hydrogen tanks with thermite
Yeah, it's called "nimda" :D
Yeah it's different. He wants to have a fingerprint on it, right? Biometrics!
And btw, with regards to the terrorist attack, if the airports check your fingerprints (for all passengers, which would suck) and match that against the card/national database, you would know for certain who was on the plane. They have already found some of the people who were supposedly on the planes alive and well.
Win2k is not hard to secure;
Yep, there's this secure switch marked "I/O" right on the box!
I started my own game (just to check out weapons & such) on a P3 600 / 256MB / Radeon SDR / W2k. Ran well, didn't impress me. "Sprint" is a good idea, tho.
Maybe your problem is network or drivers? (or WinME, but could it be that bad?)
So is there any quantitative way to measure the speed difference? Or is everyone just gonna argue back and forth with "My language seems faster than yours!"?
Any time that you rewrite 100% of the product, you can expect the new version to be slower, more infested with bugs, and just "feel" worse than the older version which has been tended for many years.
I disagree, sure there'll be more bugs (more new code), but in fact a complete rewrite should in the end be faster and cleaner. If they somehow made the old Navigator code compliant with the standards, it would be slow nasty spagetti code. A rewrite lets you untange that mess. If it feels worse, maybe you need a different chrome?
The first time I saw the "Deeply Nested Tables" demo, I was shocked! Mozilla is MUCH faster than 4.6 laying out tables alone.
Do you have any idea how insensitive of a thing that is to say right now?
Why should we increase our support of Israel ten-fold? So that we can get attacked again? It's high time we realize the we are vulnerable, and will always be vulnerable as long as we maintain an open society. Does that mean that we shouldn't respond to this latest attack? Of course not. But at the same time, we should realize that our foreign policy is literally driving large numbers of people into suicidal frenzys!
So you propose that we show the world that terrorism is a viable way to control the United States' foreign policy?
Personally, I don't know what should be done, but whatever is done will send a message, and those in charge must carefully consider what message they want to send and what other consequences there are.
As a strange coincidence, today is the anniversary of the discovery of the island of manhattan. (1609)
Yeah, that half of my comment was wrong. I realized that from reading some of the others.
No.
You can't eat mp3s, you can't pay your rent with mp3s.
If you could "replicate" anything in the real world, the economy would collapse because no one would buy anything, but people could just make their own food, so you wouldn't *need* to buy anything. (except real estate & electricity/raw materials for replicator, unless that's out of the air)
Actually, http://www.asktog.com/TOI/toi22KeyboardVMouse2.htm l is probably better.
Still not really a *study*...
Does http://www.asktog.com/TOI/toi06KeyboardVMouse1.htm ldo any good?
;)
I suspect the results would be different with Windows' less efficient menu system. (Yes, I use windows) And personally, it sometimes takes me a minute to *locate* my mouse, let alone move my hand to it