What's different between this and the iconic perv outside the schoolyard?
Do people talk to their children anymore? They should feel comfortable telling YOU if someone starts talking to them in a sick way. If they don't, you've got MUCH bigger problems.
Spying on your children will not help, in fact, it could do more damage. Trust between parent and child is of utmost importance, erode it, and it's a long ways back.
I've heard that argument of FPS before of course, and it's true. But RPG requiring a keyboard to be optimal? RPG has nothing to do with that. I've never seen an RPG that wasn't FPS that was hard to control on a console.
And if they don't make it...it would mean no copies of C&C sold, EA makes no money, MS gets bad publicity, MS makes a lot of fanboy enemies, HALO as a brand takes a hit, MS loses money.
Yep, very logical, but nearsighted decision. Par for the course with MS of course.
This is not a flame, this is how I truly feel. This is but one thing that is completely and utterly FUCKED about america. I'm a canuck myself, which doesn't help much. The problem with us canucks is that we let the US fuck us over just as if we were their own. I tell you though, the RIAA ever shows up on my doorstep....Let's put it this way, I'll be demonstrating very directly just how many CD's I OWN, by shoving every single last one of them as far up their collective asses as my boot can kick them. Fucking god damned cancerous leeches.
But again, I do have to suggest this. The RIAA sucks, but it's the fucking scum sucker lawyers that give them teeth.
I still don't see how this can be applied so arbitrarily.
In cases like you mention, there is at lest a set of plausible events that show a logical 'possibility' that a defendant did as charged. As per your example, your kid gets cancer, there's something funny with your water, this big company is upstream from your water supply and there are no other big companies up there...There is a trail that leads somewhere.
This is being used by the RIAA as a complete wild goose chase. He did it! Nope, we've got nothing whatsoever, but we guarantee you that you can find something on him for us! How'd we come up with his name? Well, we opened a phone book to a random page and...
Shoot the lawyers, if it weren't for them the RIAA would have been laughed out of existence years ago.
You are mistaking firefox's behavior. The setting you are talking about has _some_ affect on this, but firefox's memory management is NOT what most believe it to be.
This only leaves a bad impression on people that know just enough to be dangerous. Your average joe that installs FF and never looks at their OS to see how much memory running apps are using will NEVER NOTICE because it does NOT have the affect that you and others suggest it does. FF reports more memory used than it actually has locked for itself. Sure, it's using that memory, but not blocking it. It will happily release it should the OS need it more.
Try loading up FF, browse a bunch of stuff, hike up it's mem useage a lot. Now load the crap out of your system with other memory intensive apps. Note when your system gets pissy. Note where FF's mem useage is before this, and after.
Now, load up IE, surf the exact same sites, then throw the same load at your system.
FF only _appears_ to be bad at memory management. Truth is, it's extremely good at it. Sure, there is certainly room for improvement, but unless you're seriously anal about this stuff, you will NOT notice FF dragging your system down, because it doesn't.
Here's a good metaphor for you: Do you determine how fast your car is going by it's current RMP's? No, of course not. It's only part of the equation. Just because it's redlining at 8000RMP does not mean your car can't go any faster, get out of first darned it!
IE: RPM's are an indicator of a SINGLE METRIC in a whole system. You can't measure the performance of the entire system solely on that single metric. Memory useage is very similar in this sense.
Unless you actually go look at how much memory it has consumed, you'd never know. It is reported to windows as being used by FF, but it is used in such a way that as soon as windows needs more memory, FF lets it go, IMMEDIATELY.
But no one complains when they use their browser history to go back to a page they were on 2 hours ago and it pops out instantly out of cache do they?
And of course, well designed web applications will degrade gracefully, just for you few stragglers that refuse to allow the internet to be anything more than a text reader. Well, actually, not for you. But for the few that have _legitimate_ reasons.
BTW, low bandwidth is NOT a good reason to diss things like AJAX. Case in point, I recently upgraded one of our core web features that almost all of our low bandwidth customers were having problems with to use ajax instead of the standard postback. Lo and behold, this particular feature now works snappily and happily over very low bandwidth connections. BECAUSE of using javascript thank you very much.
If we keep buying into attitudes like yours, we'll be artificially crippling the potential of online applications. Please stop. Of course, overuse of flash and the like is not the way to go either, but there is a TON of room for innovation and improvement simply using tech that exists RIGHT NOW.
Speak for yourself. There are a couple ways to tackle this obviously highly biased diatribe that has very little basis in reality.
On the one side is the financial take. Assuming your numbers are correct, how much money is behind the 20% of 'big business' sites do you think?
Are you truly suggesting that rich web applications are something that doesn't make these companies money?
Is it impossible for widgets and templates to be wrapped up in a nice customizable package and sold to smaller businesses for very affordable rates?
Wait a sec, I'm stopping there though I could go on and on and on. (I DO apply these techs in ways that are not only beneficial, but arguably entirely depended upon, and they are used by small public organizations thank you very much!)
Your post is at the very top of this thread, modded +5, and it basically attempts to invalidate things like google maps, gmail, and other 'new techno trend' applications...Here, on Slashdot.
I have to say, wtf?
Man for mod points, that does NOT deserve +5 by any stretch of the imagination.
It's not the artists making the money. It's Apple. You're not seriously proposing otherwise are you?
It used to be the RIAA et al took the lions share, and the artist got the change. Now apple's taking their share of that pie. RIAA's not getting less. Price isn't going up. So where's apple's share coming from?
But think of this: Do you like music? Movies? Do you like _good_ music? Do you think artists will continue to produce good music if Apple's view on this were to become defacto? Have you taken a look at how much artists DON'T get paid by apple? Have you looked at the bullying tactics Apple has used to make music available on their system?
But no, you're right, it's all very cut and dried. I should be HAPPY to have to go PAY for a DRM'd version of all the albums I bought on DVD, which I also bought a lot of on Tape, which I also bought a lot of on Vinyl, and I should be HAPPY about it shouldn't I?
Please, continue pissing on your own rights, but if you wouldn't mind could you try to keep the overspray off of my yard?
Yes, I know it's easier to mod someone Troll than to actually come up with a counter argument. But I'd much rather hear a rebuttal than see this modded troll into oblivion for no reason.
I can't believe this crap is still being propagated. You know many artists or creative types?
I know 2d artists, 3d artists, writers, sound engineers, musicians...dozens of pure creative types. I know ONE of them that still uses a mac. ONE.
You know who uses macs? The damned iPod-permanently-attached-to-my-life crowd, that's who. People that can't and don't think for themselves anymore. People that know NOTHING about a mac, see one of those commercials, and go buy one so they'll be 'cool' and 'hip' again.
In other words...losers that don't and won't think for themselves.
No, it's not an absolute rule, but it DEFFINATELY describes the trend.
Agreed. They are so condescending it is disgusting. They are funny like standing around laughing at the kid being bullied in the schoolyard is funny.
I for one would expect Apple to take a higher stance than this. These are lower than any advertising MS has ever put out there. Makes you feel for the poor windows guy. Yeah, windows guys are nerds, but mac guys are F*#%ing A$$*&)#$. Real good image to portray.
If I ever start acting like that mac guy, shoot me please.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe you should be asking MS? Just a thought ;)
Did you really say that?
And did people really mod this informative?
Pray tell, how can one 'compare' new display technologies by viewing a video of said technology on your display that uses existing technology?
People, wake up already, this could be snake oil and you'd have bought it hook line and sinker.
It's time to move on now, it really is.
Haha, what world do you live in?
Where _don't_ you pay for advertisements? lol.
What's different between this and the iconic perv outside the schoolyard?
Do people talk to their children anymore? They should feel comfortable telling YOU if someone starts talking to them in a sick way. If they don't, you've got MUCH bigger problems.
Spying on your children will not help, in fact, it could do more damage. Trust between parent and child is of utmost importance, erode it, and it's a long ways back.
I've heard that argument of FPS before of course, and it's true. But RPG requiring a keyboard to be optimal? RPG has nothing to do with that. I've never seen an RPG that wasn't FPS that was hard to control on a console.
And if they don't make it...it would mean no copies of C&C sold, EA makes no money, MS gets bad publicity, MS makes a lot of fanboy enemies, HALO as a brand takes a hit, MS loses money.
Yep, very logical, but nearsighted decision. Par for the course with MS of course.
Yes. Yes, No. No. No. Absolutely.
This is not a flame, this is how I truly feel. This is but one thing that is completely and utterly FUCKED about america. I'm a canuck myself, which doesn't help much. The problem with us canucks is that we let the US fuck us over just as if we were their own. I tell you though, the RIAA ever shows up on my doorstep....Let's put it this way, I'll be demonstrating very directly just how many CD's I OWN, by shoving every single last one of them as far up their collective asses as my boot can kick them. Fucking god damned cancerous leeches.
But again, I do have to suggest this. The RIAA sucks, but it's the fucking scum sucker lawyers that give them teeth.
I still don't see how this can be applied so arbitrarily.
In cases like you mention, there is at lest a set of plausible events that show a logical 'possibility' that a defendant did as charged. As per your example, your kid gets cancer, there's something funny with your water, this big company is upstream from your water supply and there are no other big companies up there...There is a trail that leads somewhere.
This is being used by the RIAA as a complete wild goose chase. He did it! Nope, we've got nothing whatsoever, but we guarantee you that you can find something on him for us! How'd we come up with his name? Well, we opened a phone book to a random page and...
Shoot the lawyers, if it weren't for them the RIAA would have been laughed out of existence years ago.
Possibly, but that doesn't matter. What matters is did it evolve to that complexity.
Sheesh, and you expect your browser and os to be happy with that ehh?
Open up 20 instances of ie, load the same pages in there, leave em be for the same amount of time.
First, how responsive is your system with 20 IE's open vs 20 tabs in FF?
Second, how responsive is it after 2 days?
'But my ff craps out with 100 tabs and uses over a gig of memory! What a pile of crap!'
You are mistaking firefox's behavior. The setting you are talking about has _some_ affect on this, but firefox's memory management is NOT what most believe it to be.
This only leaves a bad impression on people that know just enough to be dangerous. Your average joe that installs FF and never looks at their OS to see how much memory running apps are using will NEVER NOTICE because it does NOT have the affect that you and others suggest it does. FF reports more memory used than it actually has locked for itself. Sure, it's using that memory, but not blocking it. It will happily release it should the OS need it more.
Try loading up FF, browse a bunch of stuff, hike up it's mem useage a lot. Now load the crap out of your system with other memory intensive apps. Note when your system gets pissy. Note where FF's mem useage is before this, and after.
Now, load up IE, surf the exact same sites, then throw the same load at your system.
FF only _appears_ to be bad at memory management. Truth is, it's extremely good at it. Sure, there is certainly room for improvement, but unless you're seriously anal about this stuff, you will NOT notice FF dragging your system down, because it doesn't.
Here's a good metaphor for you: Do you determine how fast your car is going by it's current RMP's? No, of course not. It's only part of the equation. Just because it's redlining at 8000RMP does not mean your car can't go any faster, get out of first darned it!
IE: RPM's are an indicator of a SINGLE METRIC in a whole system. You can't measure the performance of the entire system solely on that single metric. Memory useage is very similar in this sense.
Did you REALLY just ask that question?
OK, I'll make it _real_ simple for you, one question is all I need answered:
Are you interested in learning mapping using google maps API, or are you interested in learning AJAX with PHP?
Given the answer to that question, I sure do hope you can figure out the rest on your own. If not, I highly suggest neither.
No, no it does not use too much memory.
Unless you actually go look at how much memory it has consumed, you'd never know. It is reported to windows as being used by FF, but it is used in such a way that as soon as windows needs more memory, FF lets it go, IMMEDIATELY.
But no one complains when they use their browser history to go back to a page they were on 2 hours ago and it pops out instantly out of cache do they?
java and activex yes, that's a different conversation entirely.
As for bandwidth, I was stating that proper use of AJAX can REDUCE bandwidth useage, sheesh.
Do you still run Windows 3.1 on a 486?
Do you still drive a ford Pinto?
And of course, well designed web applications will degrade gracefully, just for you few stragglers that refuse to allow the internet to be anything more than a text reader. Well, actually, not for you. But for the few that have _legitimate_ reasons.
BTW, low bandwidth is NOT a good reason to diss things like AJAX. Case in point, I recently upgraded one of our core web features that almost all of our low bandwidth customers were having problems with to use ajax instead of the standard postback. Lo and behold, this particular feature now works snappily and happily over very low bandwidth connections. BECAUSE of using javascript thank you very much.
If we keep buying into attitudes like yours, we'll be artificially crippling the potential of online applications. Please stop. Of course, overuse of flash and the like is not the way to go either, but there is a TON of room for innovation and improvement simply using tech that exists RIGHT NOW.
Speak for yourself. There are a couple ways to tackle this obviously highly biased diatribe that has very little basis in reality.
On the one side is the financial take. Assuming your numbers are correct, how much money is behind the 20% of 'big business' sites do you think?
Are you truly suggesting that rich web applications are something that doesn't make these companies money?
Is it impossible for widgets and templates to be wrapped up in a nice customizable package and sold to smaller businesses for very affordable rates?
Wait a sec, I'm stopping there though I could go on and on and on. (I DO apply these techs in ways that are not only beneficial, but arguably entirely depended upon, and they are used by small public organizations thank you very much!)
Your post is at the very top of this thread, modded +5, and it basically attempts to invalidate things like google maps, gmail, and other 'new techno trend' applications...Here, on Slashdot.
I have to say, wtf?
Man for mod points, that does NOT deserve +5 by any stretch of the imagination.
Yes, but in whose interest?
It's not the artists making the money. It's Apple. You're not seriously proposing otherwise are you?
It used to be the RIAA et al took the lions share, and the artist got the change. Now apple's taking their share of that pie. RIAA's not getting less. Price isn't going up. So where's apple's share coming from?
Thank you, very good example. Print publishing and related work is very much in the realm of the Mac indeed.
Movies, music, game production? Not so much.
You go then MR Apple.
But think of this: Do you like music? Movies? Do you like _good_ music? Do you think artists will continue to produce good music if Apple's view on this were to become defacto? Have you taken a look at how much artists DON'T get paid by apple? Have you looked at the bullying tactics Apple has used to make music available on their system?
But no, you're right, it's all very cut and dried. I should be HAPPY to have to go PAY for a DRM'd version of all the albums I bought on DVD, which I also bought a lot of on Tape, which I also bought a lot of on Vinyl, and I should be HAPPY about it shouldn't I?
Please, continue pissing on your own rights, but if you wouldn't mind could you try to keep the overspray off of my yard?
Yes, I know it's easier to mod someone Troll than to actually come up with a counter argument. But I'd much rather hear a rebuttal than see this modded troll into oblivion for no reason.
Your FUD is showing.
I can't believe this crap is still being propagated. You know many artists or creative types?
I know 2d artists, 3d artists, writers, sound engineers, musicians...dozens of pure creative types. I know ONE of them that still uses a mac. ONE.
You know who uses macs? The damned iPod-permanently-attached-to-my-life crowd, that's who. People that can't and don't think for themselves anymore. People that know NOTHING about a mac, see one of those commercials, and go buy one so they'll be 'cool' and 'hip' again.
In other words...losers that don't and won't think for themselves.
No, it's not an absolute rule, but it DEFFINATELY describes the trend.
A roast is only a good roast when the roastee is at least given a chance at a comeback.
;))
I've got a comeback that fits perfectly, alas it never appears in the commercial:
"F@#$ You Clown!"
(It's funny, laugh
Agreed. They are so condescending it is disgusting. They are funny like standing around laughing at the kid being bullied in the schoolyard is funny.
I for one would expect Apple to take a higher stance than this. These are lower than any advertising MS has ever put out there. Makes you feel for the poor windows guy. Yeah, windows guys are nerds, but mac guys are F*#%ing A$$*&)#$. Real good image to portray.
If I ever start acting like that mac guy, shoot me please.
You've just proven my point beyond any doubt, thank you :)