I'm more amazed by the fact that someone actually bought "My Immortal" by the Kidz Bop Kids as an XXX,X00,000th song (496,700,000 if you want to be precise). Imagine a dark song by Evanescence covered by a shout-singing chorus of 10-year-olds. Now that's 99 cents well spent.
Why? Zapp Brannigan was voiced by Billy West, who's still alive. Phil Hartman, the original actor tapped for the part, died before Futurama went into production.
I heard there's a company out there playing with a new video broadcasting mechanism. Using something called a "camera," people can capture real-time images at up to 1280x720 at 60 frames per second (think of the bandwidth!) and transmit them to millions of people simultaneously with no connection lag.
I'm going to call this videomultibroadblogcasting and I swear it will take off. I'm going to make so much freaking money off the AdSense revenue.
Re:Um... the end of that press release....
on
3D Face Cameras
·
· Score: 1
The end of that press release is a standard clause that every publicly-traded company makes to cover its ass.
They're already tying together Picasa with Blogger and GMail. Of those three properties, two of them represent companies Google has acquired.
More and more services Google have benefit from a single sign-on. Like Yahoo!'s Yellow Pages, Google Local benefits from the fact that Google knows where you live. I think Google is at least considering its own IM solution, perhaps based on Jabber (open standards, remember?) so that it can tie IM records in with e-mail. That seems like a natural extension of Google's goal to enable you to search anything.
Not if you have WMA files with DRM. Out of the box, a Windows computer will rip WMA files that are only playable on that very same computer. You must disable that "feature" before iTunes (or many older WMA hardware players) will recognize ripped WMAs.
Imagine if every store had a different way of opening the front door, or a different obtusely-shaped shopping cart that you couldn't easily remove items from, or a different style of shelf just because the folks in marketing thought it'd look cool. That's the real-world analog to this whole "let's make checkboxes look different" idea.
UI consistency doesn't have as much to do with colors and sizes as it does with basic interaction. After 20 years people still barely know how to use computers; now thanks to the web, interfaces are being torn down and rebuilt in the name of looking cool and different. It sucks, and nobody really cares to change it.
OK, so it looks nice now. It still doesn't behave like a Mac OS X application at all. If you're running Tiger, hit CMD+F5 to turn on VoiceOver and see how little of the interface is actually accessible to the operating system. None of the text works with services, TAB doesn't cycle through the UI elements like you'd expect it to, and so on.
Don't worry, though. I hear the next version is going to be great. Really.
I'm using Mozilla 1.7 and spacebar acts as "page down" when I try using it to check the special boxes. The only time it actually checks/unchecks the box is when Mozilla can't page down any further.
Now I'm not about to upgrade to Mozilla 1.8.2.3.5-pr3 Alpha 7 Combo 65 (Marvellous!) just so I can play with fancy check boxes.
When I'm on Windows, every application I use should look and act like a Windows application. Keyboard shortcuts should match up across Windows applications.
When I'm on Mac OS X, every application I use should look and act like a Mac OS X application. Keyboard shortcuts, VoiceOver for audio cueing, and other OS-native features should work in every Mac OS X application.
Even native applications aren't consistent. My point is that there is no way for a web page to be consistent with a native app: the W3C can tell you if your web page is valid XHTML, but that doesn't mean that people will be able to actually use it everywhere every which way.
Ooh, sarcasm detector. That's a real useful invention! (boom)
I'm not being serious about the time Java solved the world's accessibility problems. Java applications still tend not to look or work like native apps: I can clearly tell when I'm in a Java app whereas I can't tell the difference as easily if a native Windows app was written in Delphi or MFC. Ideally the markup languages of the future will defer to the native OS for widget drawing while allowing for more capabilities (sliders, combo boxes, built-in validation) than HTML's set provides.
The examples look very nice. I still think the bigger problem is that web applications have absolutely no UI consistency between them, though. On one web site, select-boxes cause a form to be immediately submitted when a selection is made; on others, you have to click "Go." On one web site, check boxes look like boxes with check marks; on another they look like stars; on another they look like glowing orbs (not very colorblind-friendly).
This is the sort of thinking that leads to such UI atrocities as Winamp, iTunes for Windows, and Firefox for Mac OS X: all three of these ignore most of the native widget drawing capability in the name of creating a pointlessly slick, cross-OS-consistent experience.
I for one welcome the arrival of XAML and XUL: ways to describe forms that every OS will render using its own navigation and widget capabilities. It'll be as awesome as the time Java solved that problem for everyone everywhere.
DualDiscs are not CDs. They're slightly thicker. My PowerBook 12" had to be rebooted while I held down the mouse button to extricate my copy of "With Teeth" forcibly. I then returned the scratched and defective copy to Best Buy for an exchange. It wouldn't play in my Windows PC without a whole lot of clicking and popping (a clear sign of poor copy protection). I had to rip it to FLAC on a Linux workstation.
I wouldn't trust such a disc to play in a slot-loading car player if my PowerBook nearly ate it.
Right, but it's still cheaper by FAR. If I buy a $24 ink cartridge that's supposed to make 100 prints (24 cents each), I print 10 photos, and the cartridge clogs up after a few months of inactivity, I just spent $2.40 per print.
Walgreens et al do use inkjet printers, but they buy the good-quality photo paper (which costs a good deal more than regular paper) and they maintain their equipment themselves. I still don't see any reason, short of mass-production or fear of irrational allegations of child pornography, to print photos at home.
Apple wants you to buy only Apple products and services. Microsoft strongly recommends that you install only Genuine Microsoft Windows on all your computers. ICANN wants you to register a.mobi domain for mobile content. There's one reason behind all these: money.
I expect.mobi to set the world on fire just like.museum revolutionized the way museums used the internet, or the way.name encouraged everyone to buy their real name's domain, or the way.pro encouraged "professionals" to get their name for $200+. In other words, it's a poor attempt to wring money from gullible latecomers to the web.
There's a Taco Bell commercial running right now in the US that features a pretentious gadget geek boasting that all of his new products are "good to go," and that some new food item from Taco Bell is "good to go" too.
I used to say "good to go" before that commercial. Now I don't. I do plan to eat three meals a day at Taco Bell for 30 days, though...
Most stores use the cents digits to indicate the status of an item. For example,.76 might have meant "featured in our ad" that week,.41 means "on clearance,".68 means "on sale," etc.
The major numbers tend to determine price point. For example, Dell's new laser printer is the first at a sub-$100 price point.
That's great news. Good thing Britannica employed editors, not hobbyists like Wikipedia uses. Had they used solely hobbyists, people would still be edit-warring 94 years later about the "correct version" of each article.
Slashdot Mirror
Is your ego satisfied?
So how long until I don't have to physically get off my fat ass and buy a game, instead I simply download it and pay for it to suck?
Three years ago.
I'm more amazed by the fact that someone actually bought "My Immortal" by the Kidz Bop Kids as an XXX,X00,000th song (496,700,000 if you want to be precise). Imagine a dark song by Evanescence covered by a shout-singing chorus of 10-year-olds. Now that's 99 cents well spent.
You didn't expect that sales would suddenly accelerate up to the 500M mark, what with that enormous prize Apple was dangling out there for all to see?
Why? Zapp Brannigan was voiced by Billy West, who's still alive. Phil Hartman, the original actor tapped for the part, died before Futurama went into production.
Just toss it into your Netflix queue and it will be downloaded to your TiVo as soon as it's available.
I heard there's a company out there playing with a new video broadcasting mechanism. Using something called a "camera," people can capture real-time images at up to 1280x720 at 60 frames per second (think of the bandwidth!) and transmit them to millions of people simultaneously with no connection lag.
I'm going to call this videomultibroadblogcasting and I swear it will take off. I'm going to make so much freaking money off the AdSense revenue.
The end of that press release is a standard clause that every publicly-traded company makes to cover its ass.
See?
They're already tying together Picasa with Blogger and GMail. Of those three properties, two of them represent companies Google has acquired.
More and more services Google have benefit from a single sign-on. Like Yahoo!'s Yellow Pages, Google Local benefits from the fact that Google knows where you live. I think Google is at least considering its own IM solution, perhaps based on Jabber (open standards, remember?) so that it can tie IM records in with e-mail. That seems like a natural extension of Google's goal to enable you to search anything.
Not if you have WMA files with DRM. Out of the box, a Windows computer will rip WMA files that are only playable on that very same computer. You must disable that "feature" before iTunes (or many older WMA hardware players) will recognize ripped WMAs.
I don't "own" your web site just because I viewed it on my computer. My cache is not a redistributable copy for me to share with the world.
Imagine if every store had a different way of opening the front door, or a different obtusely-shaped shopping cart that you couldn't easily remove items from, or a different style of shelf just because the folks in marketing thought it'd look cool. That's the real-world analog to this whole "let's make checkboxes look different" idea.
UI consistency doesn't have as much to do with colors and sizes as it does with basic interaction. After 20 years people still barely know how to use computers; now thanks to the web, interfaces are being torn down and rebuilt in the name of looking cool and different. It sucks, and nobody really cares to change it.
OK, so it looks nice now. It still doesn't behave like a Mac OS X application at all. If you're running Tiger, hit CMD+F5 to turn on VoiceOver and see how little of the interface is actually accessible to the operating system. None of the text works with services, TAB doesn't cycle through the UI elements like you'd expect it to, and so on.
Don't worry, though. I hear the next version is going to be great. Really.
I'm using Mozilla 1.7 and spacebar acts as "page down" when I try using it to check the special boxes. The only time it actually checks/unchecks the box is when Mozilla can't page down any further.
Now I'm not about to upgrade to Mozilla 1.8.2.3.5-pr3 Alpha 7 Combo 65 (Marvellous!) just so I can play with fancy check boxes.
It's good.
When I'm on Windows, every application I use should look and act like a Windows application. Keyboard shortcuts should match up across Windows applications.
When I'm on Mac OS X, every application I use should look and act like a Mac OS X application. Keyboard shortcuts, VoiceOver for audio cueing, and other OS-native features should work in every Mac OS X application.
Even native applications aren't consistent. My point is that there is no way for a web page to be consistent with a native app: the W3C can tell you if your web page is valid XHTML, but that doesn't mean that people will be able to actually use it everywhere every which way.
Ooh, sarcasm detector. That's a real useful invention! (boom)
I'm not being serious about the time Java solved the world's accessibility problems. Java applications still tend not to look or work like native apps: I can clearly tell when I'm in a Java app whereas I can't tell the difference as easily if a native Windows app was written in Delphi or MFC. Ideally the markup languages of the future will defer to the native OS for widget drawing while allowing for more capabilities (sliders, combo boxes, built-in validation) than HTML's set provides.
The examples look very nice. I still think the bigger problem is that web applications have absolutely no UI consistency between them, though. On one web site, select-boxes cause a form to be immediately submitted when a selection is made; on others, you have to click "Go." On one web site, check boxes look like boxes with check marks; on another they look like stars; on another they look like glowing orbs (not very colorblind-friendly).
This is the sort of thinking that leads to such UI atrocities as Winamp, iTunes for Windows, and Firefox for Mac OS X: all three of these ignore most of the native widget drawing capability in the name of creating a pointlessly slick, cross-OS-consistent experience.
I for one welcome the arrival of XAML and XUL: ways to describe forms that every OS will render using its own navigation and widget capabilities. It'll be as awesome as the time Java solved that problem for everyone everywhere.
DualDiscs are not CDs. They're slightly thicker. My PowerBook 12" had to be rebooted while I held down the mouse button to extricate my copy of "With Teeth" forcibly. I then returned the scratched and defective copy to Best Buy for an exchange. It wouldn't play in my Windows PC without a whole lot of clicking and popping (a clear sign of poor copy protection). I had to rip it to FLAC on a Linux workstation.
I wouldn't trust such a disc to play in a slot-loading car player if my PowerBook nearly ate it.
Right, but it's still cheaper by FAR. If I buy a $24 ink cartridge that's supposed to make 100 prints (24 cents each), I print 10 photos, and the cartridge clogs up after a few months of inactivity, I just spent $2.40 per print.
Walgreens et al do use inkjet printers, but they buy the good-quality photo paper (which costs a good deal more than regular paper) and they maintain their equipment themselves. I still don't see any reason, short of mass-production or fear of irrational allegations of child pornography, to print photos at home.
Apple wants you to buy only Apple products and services. Microsoft strongly recommends that you install only Genuine Microsoft Windows on all your computers. ICANN wants you to register a .mobi domain for mobile content. There's one reason behind all these: money.
.mobi to set the world on fire just like .museum revolutionized the way museums used the internet, or the way .name encouraged everyone to buy their real name's domain, or the way .pro encouraged "professionals" to get their name for $200+. In other words, it's a poor attempt to wring money from gullible latecomers to the web.
I expect
Who would want to watch an idiot gorge himself on fatty food for a month? Other people who want to feel better about themselves?
There's a Taco Bell commercial running right now in the US that features a pretentious gadget geek boasting that all of his new products are "good to go," and that some new food item from Taco Bell is "good to go" too.
I used to say "good to go" before that commercial. Now I don't. I do plan to eat three meals a day at Taco Bell for 30 days, though...
Most stores use the cents digits to indicate the status of an item. For example, .76 might have meant "featured in our ad" that week, .41 means "on clearance," .68 means "on sale," etc.
The major numbers tend to determine price point. For example, Dell's new laser printer is the first at a sub-$100 price point.
There are some seasoned suicide bombers at work in Israel.
(go)
That's great news. Good thing Britannica employed editors, not hobbyists like Wikipedia uses. Had they used solely hobbyists, people would still be edit-warring 94 years later about the "correct version" of each article.