if that be the truth, then the mozilla folks should market firefox as a developers release, instead of pushing it to all users.
It's the truth, and it's pushed as a "Preview Release" and a "Technology Preview". So they should expect about as much as a public beta version of IE from it.:-P
You shouldn't treat Firefox as a polished app, and then pull out the old "it's pre version 1" speak when critcism abounds. It only frustrates users.
Yeah, and it frustrates people with insight of the Firefox status if people whine about pre-1.0 software that's released for preview purposes (says so right on the Mozilla.org front page).
And don't forget that few people today know what's going to be so great about Longhorn after Microsoft revealed the slightly shocking news that NONE of the features they earlier said were to be the "three cornerstores" (Avalon, WinFS, Indigo) of Longhorn was going to be exclusive to it (or in the case with WinFS, not even included).
I also think Microsoft can play their game like they once did -- they didn't have the trouble with monopoly lawsuits (these are nothing to MS financially but more of a PR problem), a strengthened open source movement, and a changing IT climate to deal with before. Viruses have become an ever increasing problem, and Microsoft have been unfortunate enough to pick the software development model that have most trouble with this. There's only so much you can do as a company against a world of hackers. All they can do is to fight to preserve their reputation here as much as possible. It's no coincidence they HAD to take developers from Longhorn to get Windows XP SP2 out as quickly as possible, any coming major OS be damned.
Of course, MS is and will be a major factor in the software industri for a long time to come, just saying that the computer world has changed a great deal from Microsoft's point of view.
Mozilla's a great project, but I'm still using the lighter, faster browser with half the download size. Tabbed browsing? Opera did that first. Mouse gestures? Opera did that first. All of the major features people ooh and aww over in Firebird existed in Opera first and were copied. And my Opera takes up WAY less memory and is way more responsive. And I don't need to know XUL to customize my toolbars *exactly* how I want.:) I've got every single button in tiny size running down the left side of my screen, with tabs and the addressbar running along the bottom. My transfers window is in a sidebar on the right side of my screen.
... and best of all, you don't have to download an extension like this.:-P
Seriously, I find both browsers good, but for the above reason and because I favor open source software when it comes to stuff that have very much to do with internet security (like browsers), I'm going for Firefox. But I agree Opera has a rich feature set and an innovative team of designers behind it. However, I can't say I care much who was first about what feature. As long as a browser has the features I need, I'm happy.:-)
I don't think there's a need (or way) to disable tabs in Firefox. Maybe with an extension. However, if you don't middle click on links, and left click in the Bookmark menu, etc, (in other words -- how IE users would use Firefox) I wonder if you'll ever see tabs in Firefox?
Of course, the parachute that was designed to slow it down was not soundly built.
I'll just jump in and be serious here -- actually, according to the article, the parachute was working, but what happened was instead a communications failutre. Seems like they couldn't tell it to use them for some reason.
A semi-automatic thing knowing when it enters the atmosphere like the Spirit/Opportunity probes would maybe have been safer?
But then again, this whole thing was designed to be a publicity stunt with a cool "catch" from helicopters as it came back to Earth. Which instead turned into lesson it seems like they've learned now when asked about it.
First you say one will slaughter another, then you say the top end chips have roughly the same performance?? I guess one of the top end AMD chips is an Athlon 64 3700+; which Intel processor are you comparing with?
Using that theory, the probes would've been pulled back much sooner, wouldn't they? It's not like they have much reason to slow down dramatically now if they didn't have before, unless they hit something.;-)
All gravity also has its effect diminishing by the square of the distance, and that's why e.g. the Earth don't pull Mars too much towards it.:-)
I'm also very much an amateur in these areas, but since the bodies' work individually and not as one big force, I doubt there's any such thing as a "solar system gravitational force". The sun would be the by far greatest though.
Ah, I see it's still too early in the morning for me..:-) Some wild misunderstanding going on there in my parent post. To give a more proper answer -- Slashdot is visited by heaps of europeans, so it could still be interesting for them (and Slashdot will with this article catch the attention of many europeans). I doubt they'll visit Slashdot looking for opinions though.
"The Common Language Runtime (CLR) is Microsoft's commercial implementation of the Common Language Infrastructure (CLI) specification. The CLI specification is an international standard for creating development and execution environments in which languages & libraries work together seamlessly."
I'm afraid I'll be waiting for the day when George reconsiders and releases the untouched originals.
I don't really get was this is all about... Sometimes, geeks motivate this by saying that the Special Edition incorrectly makes Han Solo look less like who he is, but come on, the entire TRILOGY shows pretty well who he is. Lucas just changed some tiny bits here and there; how can those changes be so important? So you can re-live your geek childhood by watching the original??
I just don't get it... How can a few scenes totalling in just minutes turn one movie from "woo, I must have!" into "meh, unbuyable"? They might affect the plot somewhat, but when looking at the big picture, they definitely don't.
They don't even know when they'll start developing "TVs that zoom in for true close-ups".
Unlike the current TVs that simply scale the image, Sony's technology does 'true' zooming by digitally enhancing the signal to communicate gloss, depth and texture.
Call me crazy, but I think twenty years is a pretty damn long product development cycle.
Although some development have been made, I think it's more of an idea than Microsoft developing it for 12 years now. I doubt MS made much work on WinFS at the time of Windows 2000, for example.
I'd rather have the drop shadows directed than equal at all borders, like a light would be directly on top of the window. It makes them look more "sunk" into the desktop than having a drop shadow. But that's just a nitpick of course.:-)
"It seems like the game is about taking command of a starship in the 24th century."
Hmm, to me this doesn't sounds like a game well suited for being a MMORPG. A Lord of the Rings MMORPG does, but not one where you command a (note: a) ship in a vast galaxy. Galaxies are mostly empty. How much socialization will be going on then? How immersive will the atmosphere be?
Will it consist of OMGLOLBBQ we met a Bird of Prey, kill them! OK, done, let's move on, then OMGLOL we must go look at the Borg Cubes? Possibly -- which makes me wonder why this is a MMORPG. Maybe it's just me, but I have a hard time seeing how a game like this will make you go "WOW, what a vast cool world" if you'd be mostly just playing in a starship.
When even Star Wars Galaxies (which I think had better potential since SW is traditionally also a lot about the planets -- actual worlds) ended up pretty bad, I don't see how this game will not end up as just a cash cow attempt backed up by a powerful well-known label with no special spirit and immersiveness about it.
Slashdot Mirror
if that be the truth, then the mozilla folks should market firefox as a developers release, instead of pushing it to all users.
:-P
It's the truth, and it's pushed as a "Preview Release" and a "Technology Preview". So they should expect about as much as a public beta version of IE from it.
You shouldn't treat Firefox as a polished app, and then pull out the old "it's pre version 1" speak when critcism abounds. It only frustrates users.
Yeah, and it frustrates people with insight of the Firefox status if people whine about pre-1.0 software that's released for preview purposes (says so right on the Mozilla.org front page).
Since Longhorn is a long way out
And don't forget that few people today know what's going to be so great about Longhorn after Microsoft revealed the slightly shocking news that NONE of the features they earlier said were to be the "three cornerstores" (Avalon, WinFS, Indigo) of Longhorn was going to be exclusive to it (or in the case with WinFS, not even included).
I also think Microsoft can play their game like they once did -- they didn't have the trouble with monopoly lawsuits (these are nothing to MS financially but more of a PR problem), a strengthened open source movement, and a changing IT climate to deal with before. Viruses have become an ever increasing problem, and Microsoft have been unfortunate enough to pick the software development model that have most trouble with this. There's only so much you can do as a company against a world of hackers. All they can do is to fight to preserve their reputation here as much as possible. It's no coincidence they HAD to take developers from Longhorn to get Windows XP SP2 out as quickly as possible, any coming major OS be damned.
Of course, MS is and will be a major factor in the software industri for a long time to come, just saying that the computer world has changed a great deal from Microsoft's point of view.
Seriously, I find both browsers good, but for the above reason and because I favor open source software when it comes to stuff that have very much to do with internet security (like browsers), I'm going for Firefox. But I agree Opera has a rich feature set and an innovative team of designers behind it. However, I can't say I care much who was first about what feature. As long as a browser has the features I need, I'm happy.
I don't think there's a need (or way) to disable tabs in Firefox. Maybe with an extension. However, if you don't middle click on links, and left click in the Bookmark menu, etc, (in other words -- how IE users would use Firefox) I wonder if you'll ever see tabs in Firefox?
.. to the Slashdot rendering problems I have with 0.9?
= 217527
:-/ (which means it will come in a post-1.0 Firefox release, like Firefox 1.1 or so)
You may be talking about this bug:
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id
That one is unfortunately only fixed on the Firefox trunk.
Of course, the parachute that was designed to slow it down was not soundly built.
I'll just jump in and be serious here -- actually, according to the article, the parachute was working, but what happened was instead a communications failutre. Seems like they couldn't tell it to use them for some reason.
A semi-automatic thing knowing when it enters the atmosphere like the Spirit/Opportunity probes would maybe have been safer?
But then again, this whole thing was designed to be a publicity stunt with a cool "catch" from helicopters as it came back to Earth. Which instead turned into lesson it seems like they've learned now when asked about it.
First you say one will slaughter another, then you say the top end chips have roughly the same performance?? I guess one of the top end AMD chips is an Athlon 64 3700+; which Intel processor are you comparing with?
Using that theory, the probes would've been pulled back much sooner, wouldn't they? It's not like they have much reason to slow down dramatically now if they didn't have before, unless they hit something. ;-)
:-)
All gravity also has its effect diminishing by the square of the distance, and that's why e.g. the Earth don't pull Mars too much towards it.
I'm also very much an amateur in these areas, but since the bodies' work individually and not as one big force, I doubt there's any such thing as a "solar system gravitational force". The sun would be the by far greatest though.
Hmm, if it's that simple, why don't NASA just send 'idnoclip' to the probes?
Heck, send 'idkfa' too so they're better prepared than with a measly disc of naked humans when they meet the aliens.
The WWW will eventually die, along with other common Internet technologies!
PlanetLab? Not RTFA, I suppose that's to make a new planet for us?
Thanks, Intel!
Oh my god, that must be real high definition!!
But why the heck do you need 600 G5s to view it?
This "locking viewers in with Apple hardware" bullshit must go!
Ah, I see it's still too early in the morning for me.. :-) Some wild misunderstanding going on there in my parent post. To give a more proper answer -- Slashdot is visited by heaps of europeans, so it could still be interesting for them (and Slashdot will with this article catch the attention of many europeans). I doubt they'll visit Slashdot looking for opinions though.
Since /. is US centric, and this appears to be an EU matter, why would they give a rat's ass what most of us have to say on the matter?
/. visitors give a rat's ass about US matters?
For the same reason european
In this case, the reason might be: The US government might get ideas of going the same way if this proposal gets through.
I wonder If I was alone thinking about something like this when reading the title? :-)
If you're so upset by a movie scene being changed to something you don't like, I question your mental health. :-P
No -- I'll copy this quote from MSDN...
The CLR:
So, the CLR is an implementation, not a standard.
How about a raid RAID-0 system using the entire Internet?
Oohh yeah, baby!
I'm afraid I'll be waiting for the day when George reconsiders and releases the untouched originals.
I don't really get was this is all about... Sometimes, geeks motivate this by saying that the Special Edition incorrectly makes Han Solo look less like who he is, but come on, the entire TRILOGY shows pretty well who he is. Lucas just changed some tiny bits here and there; how can those changes be so important? So you can re-live your geek childhood by watching the original??
I just don't get it... How can a few scenes totalling in just minutes turn one movie from "woo, I must have!" into "meh, unbuyable"? They might affect the plot somewhat, but when looking at the big picture, they definitely don't.
Sony Develops TVs That Zoom in for True Close-ups
No, they've developed a new version of a chip.
They don't even know when they'll start developing "TVs that zoom in for true close-ups".
Unlike the current TVs that simply scale the image, Sony's technology does 'true' zooming by digitally enhancing the signal to communicate gloss, depth and texture.
Using which definition of "true"?
Call me crazy, but I think twenty years is a pretty damn long product development cycle.
Although some development have been made, I think it's more of an idea than Microsoft developing it for 12 years now. I doubt MS made much work on WinFS at the time of Windows 2000, for example.
No, since I rarely look for those books. Not to brag and pretend I know so much, but Internet has replaced a whole lot of my book needs.
I prefer not censoring the price of things (or other information) just because a government has anything to do with it.
I'd rather have the drop shadows directed than equal at all borders, like a light would be directly on top of the window. It makes them look more "sunk" into the desktop than having a drop shadow. But that's just a nitpick of course. :-)
"It seems like the game is about taking command of a starship in the 24th century."
Hmm, to me this doesn't sounds like a game well suited for being a MMORPG. A Lord of the Rings MMORPG does, but not one where you command a (note: a) ship in a vast galaxy. Galaxies are mostly empty. How much socialization will be going on then? How immersive will the atmosphere be?
Will it consist of OMGLOLBBQ we met a Bird of Prey, kill them! OK, done, let's move on, then OMGLOL we must go look at the Borg Cubes? Possibly -- which makes me wonder why this is a MMORPG. Maybe it's just me, but I have a hard time seeing how a game like this will make you go "WOW, what a vast cool world" if you'd be mostly just playing in a starship.
When even Star Wars Galaxies (which I think had better potential since SW is traditionally also a lot about the planets -- actual worlds) ended up pretty bad, I don't see how this game will not end up as just a cash cow attempt backed up by a powerful well-known label with no special spirit and immersiveness about it.
Read this
:-P
"Weta Digital Supercomputer For Hire"
as
"Weta Digital Supercomputer On Fire"
Thought, whoa, finally some big news on Slashdot!
But no... Anyone willing to go with me to put them on fire for some hot Beowulf cluster action?