I also have been writing web applications for five or more years. Client side scripting is more and more an integral part. The lack of it makes them just web pages with some "application" application, like Slashdot for example.
When you talk about "the web" being the platform, you're not talking about applications, you're talking about web pages with application-like usage patterns.
Only a fraction of applications built with the browser as the platform require that the most absolute cross-platform "everyone" be able to use them without out of the box.
Sounds like you've just made your application dependent upon Javascript. That's not good practice
Don't be ridiculous. Web Applications must depend upon a client side programming language. Web pages need not depend on a client side programming language. Applications have specific target platforms and requirements. Pages however are expected to be at least viewable on a much broader range of browser platforms.
This is exactly the disparity that the MMP/Additional Member voting/seat distribution system was invented for, I believe. It works quite successfully in a number of countries.
One of the main problems is people have come to expect free downloading of music and video. Why should I pay when I can get it from eDonkey or BitTorrent for free? In the music realm, iTunes has made some inroads into legal, pay downloads. But free still trumps $1 per track for a lot of people.
I think this is one of the fundamental misinterpretations of online music/video piracy.
I don't believe it's about price or "free" at all, I believe it's about convenience. The question that people ask themselves is, "What is the easiest way to get what I want? Which is the path of least resistance? What offers the most convenience?"
Traditionally it's been easier to just go out and buy the product rather than hunt out an illegal copy, but the internet has turned that on its head. The affected industries have to get their acts together and turn things back around to how they should be. Initiatives like the iTunes Music Store go a long way towards achieving that, but nothing practical is being offered for TV/movies as of yet.
I *loved* the mailbox drawer. It was totally part of my workflow to have the drawer closed, then it would only appear when I started dragging a message, thus allowing me to drop the message in a folder, then have the drawer close again afterwards.
This new approach of having the mailbox list take up space in the main window is not only ugly, it's a usability step backwards.
Makes sense. Sometimes it's nice to have that break away from the cluster of crap that builds up over time. Was just prodding you to see if you knew about "archive install" really;) People seem to skip over it, due to expecting things to fuck up like in the Windows world.
You know you didn't have to do that, right? OS X has a built in "Archive install" that does exactly that backup process for you. It pulls all your data, settings and programs aside, wipes off the old Panther install, installs Tiger, then places all your data, settings and programs back in place.
It's absolutely painless and I've never seen it fail once. All that effort you went through, that's Windows-think. You don't need to go through that process in Mac land;)
All of what you say about RMS may be true, but it doesn't matter because RMS was (and still is) *right*.
It's because RMS's convictions are right in such important ways that we enjoy the free software/open source world we have now. You can keep putting his character on the stand as often as you like, but it won't change the fact that we owe RMS and his principles an incredible amount, and should be very glad of his continued strict adherence to those principles.
Totalitarian regimes usually get to power with the peoples' approval. What you're seeing in the US is par for course for the introduction of totalitarianism. Hilter was democratically elected, communism in Russia and China was brought about by peoples' revolutions.
But sure, Bush isn't likely to cancel elections and claim America no longer a democracy, so the stupidity only need go on until the next election.
The graphical ads have been out of beta and running live for many months now. In my Adsense settings I can select whether I want a particular ad block to allow graphical ads or not. That meaning that the ad block will still display text ads unless adsense thinks they have a particularly relevant graphical ad to put in it on occasion, in which case they will.
They're still quite rare though. Whether that's because I'm not a targeted demographic, or not going to targeted sites, or because there simply aren't many people choosing to advertise graphically, or something else entirely... *shrug*
I say you're still exaggerating. That "rare bug" was indeed rare for me, and I've been using Finder spatially for more than a year.
The open file dialogues do not need to be spatial. It'd be nice, but it's not fundamentally necessary for you to use Finder spatially.
Icons on the desktop update periodically. But I keep very few (if any at all) icons on my desktop, so the slight delay is no concern to me. A cluttered desktop suggests poorly organised file management anyway. And slow updates on the desktop hardly relate to spatial browsing in any way.
Again, it is not "lacking spatial features". It is likely the best spatial browser available still, possibly next to Gnome's Nautilus.
You only qualify one aspect of how Finder "fucks it up", and what you describe is a rare bug. Finder doesn't "fuck it up", it largely gets it right.
Some folders opening in metal is appropriate, because that might be how the window was last left (like in the case of freshly downloaded disk images). Spatial isn't the difference between metal and aqua, it's a matter of the folder opening how you last left it, which may well be metal.
The bug of some folders accidentally opening in metal even when they weren't last left that way appears to be fixed in Tiger. So if that's your only complaint, then you can rest assured.
Spatial Finder is still available in OS X -- it's just not the default.
I live by it, and am exceptionally happy with the spatial browsing model. I think at least a good 50% of the computing population would also prefer it if they took the time to break down their ingrained habits.
It's a shame that the Linux crowd, supposedly an "alternative thinking" crowd, doesn't seem to be willing to try.
The fact remains that both the MS technologies you claim Apple is ripping off were flops for MS, but will be resounding successes for Apple.
Oh and Dashboard *is* Apple ripping themselves off. It's not the programming/markup language underneath that defines the feature, it's the user visible functionality. Dashboard's functionality is very close to Desk Accessories but not very close to Active Desktop at all.
And Spotlight isn't about indexing, it's about the user visible functionality, again. There's been plenty of indexing systems over the years, but they're not important -- it's the way the user interacts with them that's important.
Re:I want animated program icons
on
Longhorn Preview
·
· Score: 1
Uhh, so the reasons why you like XP are because you have stopped using the majority of the XP shell and replaced it with third party parts?
Am I alone in seeing the logical disconnect here? Anyone?
You don't need to take the battery out to do a nasty reboot. Just hold down the power button for three seconds.
As to Finder being pretty damn shoddy for networking, I'll firmly agree to that. I've had it lock up repeatedly over the past few days, while doing large transfers over smb. I *really* hope they've fixed Finders' networking in Tiger.
Path Finder isn't an acceptable replacement to me, because I'm a spacial browser.
You're not using your tablet in mouse mode are you? You don't want it setup so that your tablet space is relative to your screen space. I forget what the other option is called, but you want that.
I use OS X almost exclusively through my tablet and used Ink for "typing" when I first got my Powerbook. It worked fabulously, and the only reason I switched back to keyboard was because I finally realised that I can actually type faster than I can write.
Right:) I usually do a "tla changes" then right after do a "tla changes --diffs", for clarity. And anything that's listing patches, I'll add "-s" or "-s -c" on the end.
But really it's not that complex. I've also been quite chuffed with it.
My only complaint is that arch doesn't do anything to ensure its own files stay in a permissions state that'll be acceptable to all people committing to the tree. So I occasionally run into "permissions hell" when working on the same branch with another developer.
It's really no complex at all. It just takes a little while to comprehend arch's version control model, if you're coming from something like CVS or SVN, which function somewhat differently.
You know, you don't have to pay for each new OS each year. You can skip one, or hell, two if you like.
The incredibly amount of work that goes into each new major OS X version easily justifies putting a price tag on them. These aren't Windows 98 to Windows Me steps, these are considerable feature and functionality upgrades.
As to writing software for them, my understanding is that they haven't often broken backwards compatibility, and thus haven't broken forwards compatibility. If you want your app to work for multiple versions, then only use the feature set exposed by the lowest version you want your app to be capable of running on. I don't think that's creating an unfair situation for developers at all.
Well put. It's such a simple thing, but the Slashdot crowd seem to be struggling with it and leading themselves off on all sorts of wild goose chases:)
CSS 2.1 and 3 are actually not necessarily all that complex. Although for implementers there's probably a reasonable degree of complexity in covering the breadth of what's defined as possible with CSS3.
I like taking a pragmatic stance where necessary, so Worse Is Better has its place in my mind. But I don't believe this is one of those places, primarily because one of WHAT-WG's defining mantras is backwards compatibility in IE. Backwards compatibility in other browsers isn't a concern, because they have the developers of them on board. So they're specifically tailored their specs to be backwards compatible in IE. This stunts the potential considerably.
We know from what Microsoft have repeatedly said (or rather, not said) that IE will not be implementing any more of the currently standing W3C specs. IE is a dead leaf on the standards tree. So why try and drag it along for *just* *one* *more* iteration, at the expense of functionality and cleanliness across the board?
It strikes me as short sighted. All it does is delay the inevitable split between Microsoft's browser and everyone else's. It buys a couple of years, maybe. But eventually the time will come where either the other browsers give in and implement whatever technologies Microsoft have forced into de facto standards (XAML?), or they shore up their strengths, stick together, and win the web back with standards. Thus forcing Microsoft to implement the standards in order to stop the shrinking of IE's market share.
By making this next iteration work in IE (and in turn stunting it), they're actually sabotaging their position in that future inevitable split. Short sighted.
Slashdot Mirror
I also have been writing web applications for five or more years. Client side scripting is more and more an integral part. The lack of it makes them just web pages with some "application" application, like Slashdot for example.
When you talk about "the web" being the platform, you're not talking about applications, you're talking about web pages with application-like usage patterns.
Only a fraction of applications built with the browser as the platform require that the most absolute cross-platform "everyone" be able to use them without out of the box.
Sounds like you've just made your application dependent upon Javascript. That's not good practice
Don't be ridiculous. Web Applications must depend upon a client side programming language. Web pages need not depend on a client side programming language. Applications have specific target platforms and requirements. Pages however are expected to be at least viewable on a much broader range of browser platforms.
Me thinks you're out of your depth.
This is exactly the disparity that the MMP/Additional Member voting/seat distribution system was invented for, I believe. It works quite successfully in a number of countries.
One of the main problems is people have come to expect free downloading of music and video. Why should I pay when I can get it from eDonkey or BitTorrent for free? In the music realm, iTunes has made some inroads into legal, pay downloads. But free still trumps $1 per track for a lot of people.
I think this is one of the fundamental misinterpretations of online music/video piracy.
I don't believe it's about price or "free" at all, I believe it's about convenience. The question that people ask themselves is, "What is the easiest way to get what I want? Which is the path of least resistance? What offers the most convenience?"
Traditionally it's been easier to just go out and buy the product rather than hunt out an illegal copy, but the internet has turned that on its head. The affected industries have to get their acts together and turn things back around to how they should be. Initiatives like the iTunes Music Store go a long way towards achieving that, but nothing practical is being offered for TV/movies as of yet.
I *loved* the mailbox drawer. It was totally part of my workflow to have the drawer closed, then it would only appear when I started dragging a message, thus allowing me to drop the message in a folder, then have the drawer close again afterwards.
This new approach of having the mailbox list take up space in the main window is not only ugly, it's a usability step backwards.
Makes sense. Sometimes it's nice to have that break away from the cluster of crap that builds up over time. Was just prodding you to see if you knew about "archive install" really ;) People seem to skip over it, due to expecting things to fuck up like in the Windows world.
What do you mean by "change the table cell text by setting style.color property"?
Text is set with innerHTML or firstChild.nodeValue.
You know you didn't have to do that, right? OS X has a built in "Archive install" that does exactly that backup process for you. It pulls all your data, settings and programs aside, wipes off the old Panther install, installs Tiger, then places all your data, settings and programs back in place.
;)
It's absolutely painless and I've never seen it fail once. All that effort you went through, that's Windows-think. You don't need to go through that process in Mac land
All of what you say about RMS may be true, but it doesn't matter because RMS was (and still is) *right*.
It's because RMS's convictions are right in such important ways that we enjoy the free software/open source world we have now. You can keep putting his character on the stand as often as you like, but it won't change the fact that we owe RMS and his principles an incredible amount, and should be very glad of his continued strict adherence to those principles.
Totalitarian regimes usually get to power with the peoples' approval. What you're seeing in the US is par for course for the introduction of totalitarianism. Hilter was democratically elected, communism in Russia and China was brought about by peoples' revolutions.
But sure, Bush isn't likely to cancel elections and claim America no longer a democracy, so the stupidity only need go on until the next election.
The graphical ads have been out of beta and running live for many months now. In my Adsense settings I can select whether I want a particular ad block to allow graphical ads or not. That meaning that the ad block will still display text ads unless adsense thinks they have a particularly relevant graphical ad to put in it on occasion, in which case they will.
... *shrug*
They're still quite rare though. Whether that's because I'm not a targeted demographic, or not going to targeted sites, or because there simply aren't many people choosing to advertise graphically, or something else entirely
Speeding kills.
I say you're still exaggerating. That "rare bug" was indeed rare for me, and I've been using Finder spatially for more than a year.
The open file dialogues do not need to be spatial. It'd be nice, but it's not fundamentally necessary for you to use Finder spatially.
Icons on the desktop update periodically. But I keep very few (if any at all) icons on my desktop, so the slight delay is no concern to me. A cluttered desktop suggests poorly organised file management anyway. And slow updates on the desktop hardly relate to spatial browsing in any way.
Again, it is not "lacking spatial features". It is likely the best spatial browser available still, possibly next to Gnome's Nautilus.
You only qualify one aspect of how Finder "fucks it up", and what you describe is a rare bug. Finder doesn't "fuck it up", it largely gets it right.
Some folders opening in metal is appropriate, because that might be how the window was last left (like in the case of freshly downloaded disk images). Spatial isn't the difference between metal and aqua, it's a matter of the folder opening how you last left it, which may well be metal.
The bug of some folders accidentally opening in metal even when they weren't last left that way appears to be fixed in Tiger. So if that's your only complaint, then you can rest assured.
Spatial Finder is still available in OS X -- it's just not the default.
I live by it, and am exceptionally happy with the spatial browsing model. I think at least a good 50% of the computing population would also prefer it if they took the time to break down their ingrained habits.
It's a shame that the Linux crowd, supposedly an "alternative thinking" crowd, doesn't seem to be willing to try.
The fact remains that both the MS technologies you claim Apple is ripping off were flops for MS, but will be resounding successes for Apple.
Oh and Dashboard *is* Apple ripping themselves off. It's not the programming/markup language underneath that defines the feature, it's the user visible functionality. Dashboard's functionality is very close to Desk Accessories but not very close to Active Desktop at all.
And Spotlight isn't about indexing, it's about the user visible functionality, again. There's been plenty of indexing systems over the years, but they're not important -- it's the way the user interacts with them that's important.
Uhh, so the reasons why you like XP are because you have stopped using the majority of the XP shell and replaced it with third party parts?
Am I alone in seeing the logical disconnect here? Anyone?
You don't need to take the battery out to do a nasty reboot. Just hold down the power button for three seconds.
As to Finder being pretty damn shoddy for networking, I'll firmly agree to that. I've had it lock up repeatedly over the past few days, while doing large transfers over smb. I *really* hope they've fixed Finders' networking in Tiger.
Path Finder isn't an acceptable replacement to me, because I'm a spacial browser.
You're not using your tablet in mouse mode are you? You don't want it setup so that your tablet space is relative to your screen space. I forget what the other option is called, but you want that.
I use OS X almost exclusively through my tablet and used Ink for "typing" when I first got my Powerbook. It worked fabulously, and the only reason I switched back to keyboard was because I finally realised that I can actually type faster than I can write.
Right :) I usually do a "tla changes" then right after do a "tla changes --diffs", for clarity. And anything that's listing patches, I'll add "-s" or "-s -c" on the end.
But really it's not that complex. I've also been quite chuffed with it.
My only complaint is that arch doesn't do anything to ensure its own files stay in a permissions state that'll be acceptable to all people committing to the tree. So I occasionally run into "permissions hell" when working on the same branch with another developer.
I'm not sure what you're on about. My daily arch use all cycles around only a few central commands
tla missing
tla changes
tla update
tla commit
tla star-update
It's really no complex at all. It just takes a little while to comprehend arch's version control model, if you're coming from something like CVS or SVN, which function somewhat differently.
You know, you don't have to pay for each new OS each year. You can skip one, or hell, two if you like.
The incredibly amount of work that goes into each new major OS X version easily justifies putting a price tag on them. These aren't Windows 98 to Windows Me steps, these are considerable feature and functionality upgrades.
As to writing software for them, my understanding is that they haven't often broken backwards compatibility, and thus haven't broken forwards compatibility. If you want your app to work for multiple versions, then only use the feature set exposed by the lowest version you want your app to be capable of running on. I don't think that's creating an unfair situation for developers at all.
Well put. It's such a simple thing, but the Slashdot crowd seem to be struggling with it and leading themselves off on all sorts of wild goose chases :)
I believe Monsanto are ahead of the curve on this particular business model.
CSS 2.1 and 3 are actually not necessarily all that complex. Although for implementers there's probably a reasonable degree of complexity in covering the breadth of what's defined as possible with CSS3.
I like taking a pragmatic stance where necessary, so Worse Is Better has its place in my mind. But I don't believe this is one of those places, primarily because one of WHAT-WG's defining mantras is backwards compatibility in IE. Backwards compatibility in other browsers isn't a concern, because they have the developers of them on board. So they're specifically tailored their specs to be backwards compatible in IE. This stunts the potential considerably.
We know from what Microsoft have repeatedly said (or rather, not said) that IE will not be implementing any more of the currently standing W3C specs. IE is a dead leaf on the standards tree. So why try and drag it along for *just* *one* *more* iteration, at the expense of functionality and cleanliness across the board?
It strikes me as short sighted. All it does is delay the inevitable split between Microsoft's browser and everyone else's. It buys a couple of years, maybe. But eventually the time will come where either the other browsers give in and implement whatever technologies Microsoft have forced into de facto standards (XAML?), or they shore up their strengths, stick together, and win the web back with standards. Thus forcing Microsoft to implement the standards in order to stop the shrinking of IE's market share.
By making this next iteration work in IE (and in turn stunting it), they're actually sabotaging their position in that future inevitable split. Short sighted.