Not so. In both IE and Mozilla XML parsing is done in native code, and is pretty darn fast. Granted, accessing the nodes in that resultant document can be tedious from a development standpoint, but if it's performance you care about, then XML will most certainly be faster. While JSON may be more terse, and easier to deal with as a developer, the browser still ends up having to create a lot of objects in interpreted code, which is a lot slower.
Oh, the irony... I wanted to reply to this with an especially nasty regexp I wrote back in the day, but my post wasn't going through. The reason given?
"Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted! Reason: Please use fewer 'junk' characters."
Although if FF usage grew by 0.64% last month, there would undoubtedly be all sorts of crowing about how FF continues to grow at the expense of IE. But a decline? That's statitical noise. Right.
It's also worth noting that for a product whose share of the market is ~8%, a 0.64% drop in overall share represents an 8% drop in its share. If you're a public company and reported an 8% drop in revenues, do you think the market would just write that off as "statitical noise"?
This is certainly interesting, but reading the report, it doesn't seem to make any mention of the win32 OSes tested. Hard to know how to interpret a statement like "Windows systems, which have average life expectancies on the order of a few minutes" unless you know if they're talking about Windows 95 or something like XP SP2.
The political agenda issue is one that really bothers me as well. Now I know this isn't going to go over well with the Slashdot crowd, but one thing I found in browsing date summary pages on Wikipedia were references to release dates for popular open source software (e.g. Firefox 1.0 released, Thunderbird 1.0 released). Now don't get me wrong -- I think these are both excellent pieces of software. But in my mind, the release of Thunderbird 1.0 doesn't belong on the same page with other events of December 7th. Not that a software release can never be a major event -- just that history needs to be the judge, not someone with an OSS agenda to push.
The reviewer even went so far as to pit the pills head-to-head against a strong dose of caffeine:
"I washed down two Calms Forté caplets with a huge mug of java at 10:30 p.m. Within 45 minutes, I was tired and ready for sleep. Score one for the pills! But as I lay in bed, a terrible thing happened. My body felt exhausted, barely able to move, yet my mind continued to race the way it does on coffee. This was like being paralyzed and was really horrifying. (I also had another trippy dream on Calms Forté: It involved an intriguing new strategy for darts, and let's just say the distinction between "dartboard" and "sternum" became somewhat meaningless.) When I tried the coffee battle again with Unisom, it took longer to fall asleep (about two hours), but I didn't have the paralysis thing. Still, my girlfriend reports I tossed and turned in bed that night like a caged animal."
I've been using Safari for a few months now. Although I still like having paper books, Safari is great in that I always have acccess to my bookshelf. No more lugging books between home and the office! One feature I wish they offered, however (are you listening O'Reilly?) would be a way to download a book for offline reading. Having used a variety of the CD bookshelf products for many years, one thing I miss with the online versions is the speed -- going over the web for every page just feels sluggish sometimes. My guess is that the reason they don't offer offline content is because it would be too easy to pirate-from/share-with friends and coworkers. Fair enough. But it seems to me that it wouldn't be too hard to come up with a way to distribute offline content (maybe in a webapp or something) such that it couldn't be shared...
There's a help desk template there you can start from, which you can then customize if you need to. You can also define conditional notification rules to send email when data is added or changed...
I generally use different password for each website, system, and device I have access to. I manage this by segmenting the password for each into 2 chunks. The first is a 2 letter abbreviation of the site/computer/etc. So yahoo, for example, would be 'yh'. To this I'll then append a standardized sequence of 4 semi-random numbers, say S7m3. The password for yahoo would then be yhS7m3. Furthermore, I'll use a different semi-random sequence for each of three zones:
1. Public, untrusted websites 2. Private, trusted 3rd party systems 3. Personal workstation and systems
This seems to be pretty secure, and allows me to easily come up with the password for a given system knowing its abbreviation and zone...
Slashdot Mirror
Key quote from the article:
"Neither Apple nor Palm has given any sign that there is any basis for the renewed speculation..."
Not so. In both IE and Mozilla XML parsing is done in native code, and is pretty darn fast. Granted, accessing the nodes in that resultant document can be tedious from a development standpoint, but if it's performance you care about, then XML will most certainly be faster. While JSON may be more terse, and easier to deal with as a developer, the browser still ends up having to create a lot of objects in interpreted code, which is a lot slower.
Oh, the irony... I wanted to reply to this with an especially nasty regexp I wrote back in the day, but my post wasn't going through. The reason given?
"Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted! Reason: Please use fewer 'junk' characters."
Guess that about sums things up.
Although if FF usage grew by 0.64% last month, there would undoubtedly be all sorts of crowing about how FF continues to grow at the expense of IE. But a decline? That's statitical noise. Right.
It's also worth noting that for a product whose share of the market is ~8%, a 0.64% drop in overall share represents an 8% drop in its share. If you're a public company and reported an 8% drop in revenues, do you think the market would just write that off as "statitical noise"?
This is certainly interesting, but reading the report, it doesn't seem to make any mention of the win32 OSes tested. Hard to know how to interpret a statement like "Windows systems, which have average life expectancies on the order of a few minutes" unless you know if they're talking about Windows 95 or something like XP SP2.
The political agenda issue is one that really bothers me as well. Now I know this isn't going to go over well with the Slashdot crowd, but one thing I found in browsing date summary pages on Wikipedia were references to release dates for popular open source software (e.g. Firefox 1.0 released, Thunderbird 1.0 released). Now don't get me wrong -- I think these are both excellent pieces of software. But in my mind, the release of Thunderbird 1.0 doesn't belong on the same page with other events of December 7th. Not that a software release can never be a major event -- just that history needs to be the judge, not someone with an OSS agenda to push.
This article reminds me of a hilarious review of sleeping pills I read on Slate:
http://slate.msn.com/?id=2062791
The reviewer even went so far as to pit the pills head-to-head against a strong dose of caffeine:
"I washed down two Calms Forté caplets with a huge mug of java at 10:30 p.m. Within 45 minutes, I was tired and ready for sleep. Score one for the pills! But as I lay in bed, a terrible thing happened. My body felt exhausted, barely able to move, yet my mind continued to race the way it does on coffee. This was like being paralyzed and was really horrifying. (I also had another trippy dream on Calms Forté: It involved an intriguing new strategy for darts, and let's just say the distinction between "dartboard" and "sternum" became somewhat meaningless.) When I tried the coffee battle again with Unisom, it took longer to fall asleep (about two hours), but I didn't have the paralysis thing. Still, my girlfriend reports I tossed and turned in bed that night like a caged animal."
I've been using Safari for a few months now. Although I still like having paper books, Safari is great in that I always have acccess to my bookshelf. No more lugging books between home and the office! One feature I wish they offered, however (are you listening O'Reilly?) would be a way to download a book for offline reading. Having used a variety of the CD bookshelf products for many years, one thing I miss with the online versions is the speed -- going over the web for every page just feels sluggish sometimes. My guess is that the reason they don't offer offline content is because it would be too easy to pirate-from/share-with friends and coworkers. Fair enough. But it seems to me that it wouldn't be too hard to come up with a way to distribute offline content (maybe in a webapp or something) such that it couldn't be shared...
Check this out:
http://www.activespace.com
There's a help desk template there you can start from, which you can then customize if you need to. You can also define conditional notification rules to send email when data is added or changed...
I generally use different password for each website, system, and device I have access to. I manage this by segmenting the password for each
into 2 chunks. The first is a 2 letter abbreviation of the site/computer/etc. So yahoo, for example, would be 'yh'. To this I'll then append a standardized sequence of 4 semi-random numbers, say S7m3. The password for yahoo would then be yhS7m3. Furthermore, I'll use a different semi-random sequence for each of three zones:
1. Public, untrusted websites
2. Private, trusted 3rd party systems
3. Personal workstation and systems
This seems to be pretty secure, and allows me to easily come up with the password for a given system knowing its abbreviation and zone...