Reminds me when I got my first Sun Workstation. One of the things that impressed me most about it was that the machine could run tons of services AND support my regular desktop usage without the two impacting each other. It was hard to resist the temptation to load the machine to bear.
For awhile I was running nightly Mozilla builds, and even considered voluteering to be the build source for Solaris Sparc binaries. (The Mozilla project had a hard time getting Solaris builds back then.) Sadly, I left the company before I could volunteer. I imagine that if they had that machine plugged into the network and turned on, it would still be building Mozilla every night, automatically.:-)
For example, he said Sun president Jonathan Schwartz -- who keeps a public blog -- was frustrated when April Fool's day came around, because he couldn't use his blog to play a practical joke.
"A few times, he's said things like 'maybe we should acquire Novell', and it changed the stock price," Vass said of Schwartz's blog. "You have to be careful... if ever he's writing anything controversial he has to get the lawyers to look at it."
Sun is buying Novell? Ack! I need to go call my stock broker!
Do you remember when it was announced that in Netscape were developing their very own OS?
I don't remember anything of the sort. What I do remember was that Netscape was seen as a cross-OS platform of APIs upon which applications could be built. Looking at how things panned out for Netscape, that seems a little odd these days, but its successor Mozilla (not to be confused with the original Netscape codename) has succeeded where Netscape failed. Even using just the standards compliant HTML/CSS/JavaScript environment, very powerful applications can be based on Mozilla. If you take a leap, XUL and other supporting Mozilla technologies can be leveraged for an even more powerful experience.
Andreessen: I lined up interviews and took a programming job at a company in Palo Alto. I liked the idea of moving someplace that wasn't so cold. The Valley was kind of dormant then. Apple Computer was the walking dead.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.:-)
Durring this time, I was too busy collecing MOD files and playing them back with WinMOD. Ahhh...the memories.
I assume you mean Mod4Win? Furthermore, I assume you had at least two different versions of "All That She Wants" by Ace of Bass, and at least one version of "What is Love?" By Haddaway?;-)
Asa is saying that Linux *must* be more user-focused, and there's almost nothing in his article except good suggestions that will not remove any of the "geeky cred" or usefulness of Linux.
Indeed. FWIW, I wrote an article on this not so long ago. One of the biggest backlashes was the complaint that "We don't want Linux to be like Windows!" I found this complaint to be humorous, because I never suggested anything even remotely like Windows. The design I suggested was more like OS X, but more advanced, powerful, and Linux focused.
Even so, I had to do a followup article to clear up many of the misconceptions people had about my suggested design.
When I got my iBook a few years ago, 2.5 hours was pushing it for many Intel laptops. Dells were especially bad at slurping down their rather generous battery capacity. (In the time that my workplace provided me with a Dell laptop, I managed to chew through and spit about 3-5 battery packs. You always got that extra 15 minutes when the battery was brand new, then your time dropped like a rock.)
Sometimes I have the need to develop on Mac environment for compatibility requirements, but I don't really want to buy a Mac just for that. For example I don't buy a TUX machine to run Linux.
You would if it was important enough to you. I bought mine so that I could support Apple users. i.e. I saw a very real use for the machine. (Best purchase I ever made, BTW.) With Linux, there's just too much noise and not enough signal to make anyone want to purchase a Linux-built Desktop machine.
The real question is, will their x86 Laptops maintain the four hour battery life Mac users have come to expect? Performance is nice, but it isn't always everything. Being able to work through a long car trip, plane flight, or train ride can be far MORE important to laptop users.
A 14.4 Kbps modem can download 5 MB of data in about an hour, ignoring compression. (mp3 files can't be compressed much anyways.)
That is certainly well within the capabilities of a modem to download. I recall downloading the SLS Linux distribution at about 30 1.4 MB floppy images, and I think I only had a 9600 bps modem. It took a while, but I got it.
Mark my words: One day kid will be whining, "There's no way you could have downloaded those Linux Distributions on DSL/Cable. Lines back then only had 700K-10MB download rates. At that speed it would have taken DAYS to get a 20GB DVD Image!"
Downloaded from a BBS, had a vague description. It was like reading one of those claims about sticking a feature-length TV-res movie in only 100MB now.
It was the same for me. I found it on a website somewhere, but there was no files available to plug into it. I completely forgot about it until a friend excitedly called me up and asked if I had WinPlay3. He shot me a file or two, and I was absolutely amazed. Up until then, I'd thought MOD files were the height of computer music.;-)
And who remembers typing in all the arcane command line options to the only encoder that was generally available... l3enc and l3dec?
Ahhh, l3enc. That program was like magic in a bottle. Put a 50-100MB WAV in one end, and a 3MB MP3 would pop out the other. Considering the piss poor excuse for sound editing and ripping tools we had back then, it was amazing that I ever found anything to encode! (IIRC, I pulled music from CDs to play with the encoding.)
I don't know about lawsuits, but this article touches upon the cease and desist letters they sent out. Such a move *could* have killed MP3s, except that Thomson's licensing is very reasonable.
For one, you don't need a license for "private, non-commercial activities (e.g., home-entertainment, receiving broadcasts and creating a personal music library), not generating revenue or other consideration of any kind or for entities with an annual gross revenue less than US$ 100 000.00."
Beyond that, their royalty rates are as little as $0.75 per copy, or a one time fee of $50-60K.
Exactly what I said. Thank you for agreeing with me, Mr. Troll.
And the HTML specification actually says "elements are not tags"
Precisely. Tags are represented by a sub-set of elements. Thus in certain cases, the two words can be used interchangably. Cases like, I don't know, the one I was using originally?
But wait! We have to keep on trolling!
That whooshing sound is my point sailing over your head.
Simply assigning a handler to the onclick property of an element node overwrites whatever previous handler has already been installed there.
That whooshing sound is you trolling right on by. Think, Mr. Troll. The element is created dynamically. Just WHO do you think would have a handler on it?
The correct appropach is to use attachEvent and addEventListener.
Except that attachEvent is an IE quirk, and addEventListener is not supported by IE despite the DOM 2 Event Standard having existed for quite a long while now.
But wait! You're TROLLING! Why bother with little details like alternate implementations?
Compatibility with non-CSS user-agents is a design principle of CSS.
Backward compatibility is a design principle, not the primary purpose. CSS enhances the document presentation so that the document can render in alternate environments. This is in direct opposition to the HTML concept, which was designed only for screen usage. For example, you're ignoring this entire section from your link:
Accessibility. Several CSS features will make the Web more accessible to users with disabilities:
* Properties to control font appearance allow authors to eliminate inaccessible bit-mapped text images.
* Positioning properties allow authors to eliminate mark-up tricks (e.g., invisible images) to force layout.
* The semantics of !important rules mean that users with particular presentation requirements can override the author's style sheets.
* The 'inherit' value for all properties improves cascading generality and allows for easier and more consistent style tuning.
* Improved media support, including media groups and the braille, embossed, and tty media types, will allow users and authors to tailor pages to those devices.
Not to mention the section on device independence!
Vendor, platform, and device independence. Style sheets enable documents to remain vendor, platform, and device independent. Style sheets themselves are also vendor and platform independent, but CSS 2.1 allows you to target a style sheet for a group of devices (e.g., printers).
But you go right on trolling, Mr. Troll. You seem to enjoy it SOOOOOOO much.
You've just blown a lot of hot air and called me names. Who's the real troll?
I've called you a troll. Which you are. Why? Because you initiated an uncalled for attack, ignored the complexities of the issues, picked at nits, carried a holier-than-thou arrogant attitude, made sure your post was content free, and now just tried to call me a troll. (To you folks back home, pay attention. Trolls will often accuse you of trolling in an attempt to remove the spotlight from themselves. Don't fall for this utterly stupid ruse!)
Enjoy your trolling day, Mr. Troll. Oh, and don't let the door hit you on the way out.:-)
As far as I'm concerned, the degrading isn't necessary due to the areas where these DHTML controls would be used.
The DHTML controls are necessary for much more powerful applications where DHTML can be used to deliver a networked form of Desktop application. Google has been in the spotlight with their GMail and Google Maps interfaces, but they're not the only ones producing powerful software in JS/HTML/CSS.
In some of these applications, you may have no choice but to replace the standard controls. The standard controls are heavyweight, and often cannot be covered over, clipped, or otherwise not/partially shown. Lightweight components don't have those issues. In addition, lightweight component can improve the user experience by allowing the developer to modify the behavior of the controls. For example, the standard HTML button is not a toggleable control. But a DHTML button can be made toggleable. Same with three state checkboxes, on-demand dropdowns, styleable text areas, and other control modifications that HTML doesn't allow.
Slashdot Mirror
Reminds me when I got my first Sun Workstation. One of the things that impressed me most about it was that the machine could run tons of services AND support my regular desktop usage without the two impacting each other. It was hard to resist the temptation to load the machine to bear.
:-)
For awhile I was running nightly Mozilla builds, and even considered voluteering to be the build source for Solaris Sparc binaries. (The Mozilla project had a hard time getting Solaris builds back then.) Sadly, I left the company before I could volunteer. I imagine that if they had that machine plugged into the network and turned on, it would still be building Mozilla every night, automatically.
For example, he said Sun president Jonathan Schwartz -- who keeps a public blog -- was frustrated when April Fool's day came around, because he couldn't use his blog to play a practical joke.
... if ever he's writing anything controversial he has to get the lawyers to look at it."
"A few times, he's said things like 'maybe we should acquire Novell', and it changed the stock price," Vass said of Schwartz's blog. "You have to be careful
Sun is buying Novell? Ack! I need to go call my stock broker!
Do you remember when it was announced that in Netscape were developing their very own OS?
I don't remember anything of the sort. What I do remember was that Netscape was seen as a cross-OS platform of APIs upon which applications could be built. Looking at how things panned out for Netscape, that seems a little odd these days, but its successor Mozilla (not to be confused with the original Netscape codename) has succeeded where Netscape failed. Even using just the standards compliant HTML/CSS/JavaScript environment, very powerful applications can be based on Mozilla. If you take a leap, XUL and other supporting Mozilla technologies can be leveraged for an even more powerful experience.
Andreessen: I lined up interviews and took a programming job at a company in Palo Alto. I liked the idea of moving someplace that wasn't so cold. The Valley was kind of dormant then. Apple Computer was the walking dead.
:-)
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
The moment you add any text after the checkbox, boom. No longer works.
His scheme replaces the entire checkbox area. If you want to add text, it must be outside the SPAN area.
This version avoids the issue all together, but it isn't complete. You need to add a hidden field to store the value in.
I was quoting the parent. But good catch, it slipped by me. :-)
Durring this time, I was too busy collecing MOD files and playing them back with WinMOD. Ahhh...the memories.
;-)
I assume you mean Mod4Win? Furthermore, I assume you had at least two different versions of "All That She Wants" by Ace of Bass, and at least one version of "What is Love?" By Haddaway?
Asa is saying that Linux *must* be more user-focused, and there's almost nothing in his article except good suggestions that will not remove any of the "geeky cred" or usefulness of Linux.
Indeed. FWIW, I wrote an article on this not so long ago. One of the biggest backlashes was the complaint that "We don't want Linux to be like Windows!" I found this complaint to be humorous, because I never suggested anything even remotely like Windows. The design I suggested was more like OS X, but more advanced, powerful, and Linux focused.
Even so, I had to do a followup article to clear up many of the misconceptions people had about my suggested design.
I love my 12" PowerBook, but I have no idea how Apple (or nearly all laptop vendors) get away with advertising such blatently false battery life.
;-)
Geez. Glad I went with the iBook. I get four hours, easy!
When I got my iBook a few years ago, 2.5 hours was pushing it for many Intel laptops. Dells were especially bad at slurping down their rather generous battery capacity. (In the time that my workplace provided me with a Dell laptop, I managed to chew through and spit about 3-5 battery packs. You always got that extra 15 minutes when the battery was brand new, then your time dropped like a rock.)
I get 7 hours on my p4-m notebook.
;-)
so I'm thinking they may see an increase.
Sounds good to me, then. When can I buy one?
Sometimes I have the need to develop on Mac environment for compatibility requirements, but I don't really want to buy a Mac just for that. For example I don't buy a TUX machine to run Linux.
You would if it was important enough to you. I bought mine so that I could support Apple users. i.e. I saw a very real use for the machine. (Best purchase I ever made, BTW.) With Linux, there's just too much noise and not enough signal to make anyone want to purchase a Linux-built Desktop machine.
The real question is, will their x86 Laptops maintain the four hour battery life Mac users have come to expect? Performance is nice, but it isn't always everything. Being able to work through a long car trip, plane flight, or train ride can be far MORE important to laptop users.
A 14.4 Kbps modem can download 5 MB of data in about an hour, ignoring compression. (mp3 files can't be compressed much anyways.)
That is certainly well within the capabilities of a modem to download. I recall downloading the SLS Linux distribution at about 30 1.4 MB floppy images, and I think I only had a 9600 bps modem. It took a while, but I got it.
Mark my words: One day kid will be whining, "There's no way you could have downloaded those Linux Distributions on DSL/Cable. Lines back then only had 700K-10MB download rates. At that speed it would have taken DAYS to get a 20GB DVD Image!"
MP3's? Who's talking about MP3s? I'm talking about a video! The lyrics are great in the video:
;-P
"Hello, a cup of beer?"
"I don't understand a word, okay?"
"The chorus is 'Numa Numa'"
"Gatz is making me tea"
"Ma-ia-Enough Already!"
As I said, WAY better than the original.
This version is *way* better. And how can you not like the lyrics?
Downloaded from a BBS, had a vague description. It was like reading one of those claims about sticking a feature-length TV-res movie in only 100MB now.
;-)
It was the same for me. I found it on a website somewhere, but there was no files available to plug into it. I completely forgot about it until a friend excitedly called me up and asked if I had WinPlay3. He shot me a file or two, and I was absolutely amazed. Up until then, I'd thought MOD files were the height of computer music.
And who remembers typing in all the arcane command line options to the only encoder that was generally available... l3enc and l3dec?
Ahhh, l3enc. That program was like magic in a bottle. Put a 50-100MB WAV in one end, and a 3MB MP3 would pop out the other. Considering the piss poor excuse for sound editing and ripping tools we had back then, it was amazing that I ever found anything to encode! (IIRC, I pulled music from CDs to play with the encoding.)
I don't know about lawsuits, but this article touches upon the cease and desist letters they sent out. Such a move *could* have killed MP3s, except that Thomson's licensing is very reasonable.
For one, you don't need a license for "private, non-commercial activities (e.g., home-entertainment, receiving broadcasts and creating a personal music library), not generating revenue or other consideration of any kind or for entities with an annual gross revenue less than US$ 100 000.00."
Beyond that, their royalty rates are as little as $0.75 per copy, or a one time fee of $50-60K.
...if you remember using WinPlay3 back in the day!
;-)
If you don't, well, maybe you were too young back then.
Exactly what I said. Thank you for agreeing with me, Mr. Troll.
And the HTML specification actually says "elements are not tags"
Precisely. Tags are represented by a sub-set of elements. Thus in certain cases, the two words can be used interchangably. Cases like, I don't know, the one I was using originally?
But wait! We have to keep on trolling!
That whooshing sound is my point sailing over your head.
Simply assigning a handler to the onclick property of an element node overwrites whatever previous handler has already been installed there.
That whooshing sound is you trolling right on by. Think, Mr. Troll. The element is created dynamically. Just WHO do you think would have a handler on it?
The correct appropach is to use attachEvent and addEventListener.
Except that attachEvent is an IE quirk, and addEventListener is not supported by IE despite the DOM 2 Event Standard having existed for quite a long while now.
But wait! You're TROLLING! Why bother with little details like alternate implementations? Compatibility with non-CSS user-agents is a design principle of CSS.
Backward compatibility is a design principle, not the primary purpose. CSS enhances the document presentation so that the document can render in alternate environments. This is in direct opposition to the HTML concept, which was designed only for screen usage. For example, you're ignoring this entire section from your link:Not to mention the section on device independence!But you go right on trolling, Mr. Troll. You seem to enjoy it SOOOOOOO much.
You've just blown a lot of hot air and called me names. Who's the real troll?
I've called you a troll. Which you are. Why? Because you initiated an uncalled for attack, ignored the complexities of the issues, picked at nits, carried a holier-than-thou arrogant attitude, made sure your post was content free, and now just tried to call me a troll. (To you folks back home, pay attention. Trolls will often accuse you of trolling in an attempt to remove the spotlight from themselves. Don't fall for this utterly stupid ruse!)
Enjoy your trolling day, Mr. Troll. Oh, and don't let the door hit you on the way out.
As long as you can access port 8090, the Coral Cache is still available:
t ml
http://www.otherpower.com.nyud.net:8090/17page1.h
and what use might a windtunnel in my apartment be? It's not like I'm designing fighter-jets or the new Ford here.
:-)
Wind Turbine, not Wind Tunnel. You can stick it on your roof and run a cable to your computer. Poor man's power, as it were.
Don't feel too bad, though. I misread the headline the first time as well.
As far as I'm concerned, the degrading isn't necessary due to the areas where these DHTML controls would be used.
The DHTML controls are necessary for much more powerful applications where DHTML can be used to deliver a networked form of Desktop application. Google has been in the spotlight with their GMail and Google Maps interfaces, but they're not the only ones producing powerful software in JS/HTML/CSS.
In some of these applications, you may have no choice but to replace the standard controls. The standard controls are heavyweight, and often cannot be covered over, clipped, or otherwise not/partially shown. Lightweight components don't have those issues. In addition, lightweight component can improve the user experience by allowing the developer to modify the behavior of the controls. For example, the standard HTML button is not a toggleable control. But a DHTML button can be made toggleable. Same with three state checkboxes, on-demand dropdowns, styleable text areas, and other control modifications that HTML doesn't allow.