Oh and before you assume I meant don't use CSS, I meant don't use unsupported or improperly implemented features. There are a million ways to do things in development. If you absolutely need something, you can find another way to implement it.
CSS is not properly implemented so therefore don't use it. Simple as that. Every web developer knows that in order for your code to be cross browser compliant, its usually best to stick to 5 year old standards.
Really? Well you should tell that to Amazon and let them know just how their website doesn't work in IE. Which is kind of amazing considering how long they've been in business. That is unless your an idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about. But I doubt that... since someone named the MillionthMonkey must be a rocket scientist. Either that or a darwinian dropout.
Oddly enough it won't. It will only affect web developers who code to non-standards. Most of us code to a set of standards so that all our code can work well in ALL browsers not just IE. Those who focus on IE only and use IE specific tags and ActiveX usually put themselves out of a job by neglecting a large percentage of the market and cause enough complaints by consumers/users that the whole app has to be rebuilt.
So no... this won't really affect us. Not for at least another 5 years...
There is a reason their bones are still comprised of a large amount of cartilege at their young age; nature knows they're uncoordinated and clumsy. What kind of overprotective, fearful nation are we becoming? Are we going to force our children to start wearing those padded suits they use to train attack dogs soon? Mother of the nation, you are going to strangle your children with those apron strings!
Most IDEs and text editors default to the environment on which they are installed. So the fault isn't so much with the software since that is a sensible default. If they were developing on Linux for Linux, this wouldn't be an issue.
This goes back to something I say daily... 'develop on the platform you are releasing for'. If you are releasing something for Windows, Mac and Linux, develop and test on all.
I myself do web dev and insisted that I use Linux as my desktop since our server is a LAMP install. This has proven useful since the other developers using Windows have had several problems with end of line characters in Windows causing issues with files as well as our versioning control system.
Always develop and test on the platform you are releasing for.
No, it's people being anal about separation of free and 99% free that lead to forks. Eric Raymond is right that while prprietary is trying to meet free halfway, free has to do the same.
And this isn't about that at all anyway. It's about Firefox wanting to brand their product and Debian getting pissy that their branding can't be fucked with. It's called marketing... deal with it.
Firefox is a piece of free software. The artwork that accompanies the code should be free as well. If the Mozilla Foundation is not going to follow the principles of free software then I see no reason why the Debian people should have to put up with their bullshit.
See this is why adoption isn't that high with alot of OSS. They don't understand branding and marketing. In order to brand your product, you have to have copyrighted logos that no one else can use and claim to be as good or the same thing as your product. Branding is also essential to marketing and without protecting your brands, you cannot effectively mrket the product without other people using the same brand on a fork that may be extremely buggy thus reflecting directly onto your project and causing loss of market share due to negative opinions of the brand.
This is a discussion that should not even be happening. Every OSS project should have the right to brand and market its product while still keeping the source free and certain considerations should be made to allow for branding.
It's not a fork! They are just going to add a patch that rebrands the browser. Learn your terminology
If it is a separate codebase from the trunk of the main project and isn't merging back into the main project, it is effectively a fork. Get a brain and learn your terminology! They aren't just changing images, they are maintaining their own patches and keeping their code separate from the main project. Hence, a fork.
Yes but then all software needs to comply with DEBIAN's definition of 'free'. I think in the case of Firefox (and similar future products), there needs to be a 'free enough' clause. This is just plain silly.
patch!=fork. Fork means the codebase deviates at a specific point and does not merge back into the main branch. If the code is based off the main branch and just has a load of patches, it is NOT a fork. Learn your terminology.
God does nobody read the damn articles anymore. Here's a snippet...
We have been actively working to ensure that all licensed and authorized derivations bearing the Firefox name and logo maintain these characteristics. We presently have working relationships with most of the major Linux distributions, including Red Hat, Novell, and Ubuntu.
Now unless there is something else ALSO called Ubuntu, I'm willing to bet they'll ship with Firefox.
LINUX applies to the kernel... and there are no forks of the kernel that I know of, just different versions. And a trademark still implies ownership. And the same argument still applies.
don't bet on Ubuntu still shipping with Firefox, unless they strike the same deal with MozCo RedHat and Novell did, it won't happen.
Thats basically what the Mozilla blog article said in case you neglected to read it. Allow me to put in a block quopte for you...
We have been actively working to ensure that all licensed and authorized derivations bearing the Firefox name and logo maintain these characteristics. We presently have working relationships with most of the major Linux distributions, including Red Hat, Novell, and Ubuntu.
So, I'm just guessing that you are completely wrong in this regard. Mind you this is only a guess.
They *can't*. They wish the could, but the Mozilla people are threatening to take action if they ship with the name Firefox.
This is not true in the slightest. Mozilla has tried to work with them and has NOT threatened to take legal action from any of the news articles I have read on this. In fact, they tried to bend backwards to accomodate the Debian developers requests but said they could not remove the logos and artwork for branding reasons. That and wanting all fixes to go through one group of developers is not unlike the way changes get into the Linux kernel.
So again, I don't see why Debian is making this into a monumental issue. If they want free, let people do their own builds and put Firefox in non-free repos. I don't see the need to fork.
Nothing is completely free. Even the name 'LINUX' is copyrighted. So why don't they fork Linux because I can't change the name? At a certain point, this argument gets tedious. Though I DO agree that if you wish to run a completely free system, you should be able to. So just move it into 'non-free' repo and leave it at that. If you want Firefox on your system and want a COMPLETELY free system, just do the build of the source yourself.
As an Ubuntu user, I run Flash player, Nvidia drivers and several other proprietary additions. So why is this an issue? I understand if they don't to ship copyrighted logos but big DEAL. Does this comprimise the distribtion in any way? Could this open them up to potential lawsuits? I think they should just relax and let it slide. They're being a bit anal about all this as far as I'm concerned. Luckily, Ubuntu will still ship with Firefox so not an issue (even though it is a Debian distro).
More accuyrate than a mouse?? So why even have the mouse? If the device is that damn good, why use a mouse? Having tested several of these machines each year at IHRSA and having beeing a tester for Starwars galaxies, City of Heroes, Dark Age of Camelot and several others, I didn't see any of these standing out... not even this one. And yes, if it was at IHRSA (which I'm sure it was), I played it because I keep hoping someone will come up with something that no one has thought of yet.
Unfortunately, this does not deviate from the many other devices of similar nature on the markt. Some may have a bike instead or a strider rather than a treadmill (mainly because those are lower impact and have less stress on the knees which is important for people who ARE overweight) but the controls really don't differ and create the same problems that others do. You may think it is great and awesome and I'm pleased that you do. You should buy one.
But after playing multiple games on these and trying to get these into the Microsoft Health Club, I have yet to see one that doesn't somehow ruin the experience by changing the controller. You don't seem to get the fact that the forward momentum factor CANNOT stop on a dime without significantly changing the user experience; if you wish to run fast towards a ridge and stop at the last second, you won't be able to. Hopping from ledge to ledge will usually result in you plummeting off. Backing up is impossible without the mouse.
I accept the fact that as a gamer and a reviewer, you think this is awesome. Please accept the fact that as a developer, a gamer and a former health care professional, that this did not pass my standards.
As I said... forward momentum. And you seem to be a spokesman for the company rather than a consumer so you can ease up on the sales pitch. I tried it, didn't like it. There are definitely flaws since most games are not made for your device and your device changes the physics of the game enough to make some games impossible to play. On the other hand, I imagine that there are some that are playable but again, I don't think the experience was all that enjoyable.
I read the review and regardless of how well it plays with some games, in others, you will have serious issues. The treadmill=momentum issue can be hard to control especially for quick stopping and precision games. Games that require jumping of any sort will suffer from this type of momentum because there is no quick stopping.
I used to be the lead developer at the Microsoft Health Club in Bellevue Washington and had a chance to test one of these at the health expo in Vegas (while I was attending Apachecon). You can't back up, you can't jump, the movements are very limited. I saw several of these device and while they were all nice, they all lacked in some way. Overall, I wouldn't suggest thes to anyone until they can get these prices down.
I ended up just going home and buying a couple of dance dance revolution pads for my Playstation.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh and before you assume I meant don't use CSS, I meant don't use unsupported or improperly implemented features. There are a million ways to do things in development. If you absolutely need something, you can find another way to implement it.
CSS is not properly implemented so therefore don't use it. Simple as that. Every web developer knows that in order for your code to be cross browser compliant, its usually best to stick to 5 year old standards.
Only for javascript. And believe it or not, there is a whole helluva lot more to web dev than javascript. This isn't the 90's you know.
Really? Well you should tell that to Amazon and let them know just how their website doesn't work in IE. Which is kind of amazing considering how long they've been in business. That is unless your an idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about. But I doubt that... since someone named the MillionthMonkey must be a rocket scientist. Either that or a darwinian dropout.
Oddly enough it won't. It will only affect web developers who code to non-standards. Most of us code to a set of standards so that all our code can work well in ALL browsers not just IE. Those who focus on IE only and use IE specific tags and ActiveX usually put themselves out of a job by neglecting a large percentage of the market and cause enough complaints by consumers/users that the whole app has to be rebuilt. So no... this won't really affect us. Not for at least another 5 years...
Yeah, I mean if Armani is good enough for me then it's good enough for my dog.
There is a reason their bones are still comprised of a large amount of cartilege at their young age; nature knows they're uncoordinated and clumsy. What kind of overprotective, fearful nation are we becoming? Are we going to force our children to start wearing those padded suits they use to train attack dogs soon? Mother of the nation, you are going to strangle your children with those apron strings!
Most IDEs and text editors default to the environment on which they are installed. So the fault isn't so much with the software since that is a sensible default. If they were developing on Linux for Linux, this wouldn't be an issue.
This goes back to something I say daily... 'develop on the platform you are releasing for'. If you are releasing something for Windows, Mac and Linux, develop and test on all. I myself do web dev and insisted that I use Linux as my desktop since our server is a LAMP install. This has proven useful since the other developers using Windows have had several problems with end of line characters in Windows causing issues with files as well as our versioning control system. Always develop and test on the platform you are releasing for.
No, it's people being anal about separation of free and 99% free that lead to forks. Eric Raymond is right that while prprietary is trying to meet free halfway, free has to do the same. And this isn't about that at all anyway. It's about Firefox wanting to brand their product and Debian getting pissy that their branding can't be fucked with. It's called marketing... deal with it.
Who can see this one coming down the pipeline?
Yes but then all software needs to comply with DEBIAN's definition of 'free'. I think in the case of Firefox (and similar future products), there needs to be a 'free enough' clause. This is just plain silly.
patch!=fork. Fork means the codebase deviates at a specific point and does not merge back into the main branch. If the code is based off the main branch and just has a load of patches, it is NOT a fork. Learn your terminology.
LINUX applies to the kernel... and there are no forks of the kernel that I know of, just different versions. And a trademark still implies ownership. And the same argument still applies.
Nothing is completely free. Even the name 'LINUX' is copyrighted. So why don't they fork Linux because I can't change the name? At a certain point, this argument gets tedious. Though I DO agree that if you wish to run a completely free system, you should be able to. So just move it into 'non-free' repo and leave it at that. If you want Firefox on your system and want a COMPLETELY free system, just do the build of the source yourself.
As an Ubuntu user, I run Flash player, Nvidia drivers and several other proprietary additions. So why is this an issue? I understand if they don't to ship copyrighted logos but big DEAL. Does this comprimise the distribtion in any way? Could this open them up to potential lawsuits? I think they should just relax and let it slide. They're being a bit anal about all this as far as I'm concerned. Luckily, Ubuntu will still ship with Firefox so not an issue (even though it is a Debian distro).
More accuyrate than a mouse?? So why even have the mouse? If the device is that damn good, why use a mouse? Having tested several of these machines each year at IHRSA and having beeing a tester for Starwars galaxies, City of Heroes, Dark Age of Camelot and several others, I didn't see any of these standing out... not even this one. And yes, if it was at IHRSA (which I'm sure it was), I played it because I keep hoping someone will come up with something that no one has thought of yet. Unfortunately, this does not deviate from the many other devices of similar nature on the markt. Some may have a bike instead or a strider rather than a treadmill (mainly because those are lower impact and have less stress on the knees which is important for people who ARE overweight) but the controls really don't differ and create the same problems that others do. You may think it is great and awesome and I'm pleased that you do. You should buy one. But after playing multiple games on these and trying to get these into the Microsoft Health Club, I have yet to see one that doesn't somehow ruin the experience by changing the controller. You don't seem to get the fact that the forward momentum factor CANNOT stop on a dime without significantly changing the user experience; if you wish to run fast towards a ridge and stop at the last second, you won't be able to. Hopping from ledge to ledge will usually result in you plummeting off. Backing up is impossible without the mouse. I accept the fact that as a gamer and a reviewer, you think this is awesome. Please accept the fact that as a developer, a gamer and a former health care professional, that this did not pass my standards.
As I said... forward momentum. And you seem to be a spokesman for the company rather than a consumer so you can ease up on the sales pitch. I tried it, didn't like it. There are definitely flaws since most games are not made for your device and your device changes the physics of the game enough to make some games impossible to play. On the other hand, I imagine that there are some that are playable but again, I don't think the experience was all that enjoyable.
I read the review and regardless of how well it plays with some games, in others, you will have serious issues. The treadmill=momentum issue can be hard to control especially for quick stopping and precision games. Games that require jumping of any sort will suffer from this type of momentum because there is no quick stopping.
I used to be the lead developer at the Microsoft Health Club in Bellevue Washington and had a chance to test one of these at the health expo in Vegas (while I was attending Apachecon). You can't back up, you can't jump, the movements are very limited. I saw several of these device and while they were all nice, they all lacked in some way. Overall, I wouldn't suggest thes to anyone until they can get these prices down. I ended up just going home and buying a couple of dance dance revolution pads for my Playstation.