Obama was clearly better qualitied than Palin, if nothing else because she is a stupid moron, while Obama is somewhat intelligent and able to think somewhat rationally.
Why would one not insult Sarah Palin? She is a stupid, ignorant and bigoted woman, and it's scary that she might be in a position of power. Hasn't done anything wrong? I guess being stupid, ignorant and bigoted isn't wrong, then...
Where does it say anything about preventing people from thinking about anything? It clearly refers to countering dangerous ideologies (such as Muslims wanting to blow up buildings or Christians wanting to murder abortion doctors?).
Muslims flew planes into the Twin Towers. Christians are murdering abortion doctors. Yes, holding crazy beliefs can indeed be dangerous. Why should that be true for Christianity and Islam, but not conspiracy idiots?
It's probably correct that Nokia tried other things before suing. But claiming that the iPhone is not a raging success? The iPhone is just one phone. Nokia has dozens of them. How much does the best selling Nokia phone sell compared to the iPhone? The iPhone is a real threat to other phone manufacturers, I'd say.
I doubt you'll be looking at 5 fps, and still, 30 fps doesn't sound too bad. Just turn down the resolution a couple of notches in case of lag, and the problem is solved.
Many of them already have decoders, also -- in hardware -- something Theora doesn't have at all, at any price.
But it's trivially easy to do. In fact, there's no license cost at all, and with major players like Mozilla on the desktop and mobile browser leader Opera pushing it in the mobile market, there's a real reason to support it.
No, I am arguing that if we're going to standardize on a codec, it should at least be a state-of-the-art codec, which Theora isn't.
Theora is more than good enough. And you are indeed arguing that private, commercial entities should be able to dictate what we use where. With closed, proprietary, costly technology like H.264, corporations are basically dictating what devices you are supposed to access online content from.
I mean, let me get this straight -- are you arguing that handheld devices should suck more bandwidth, or display lower-quality movies, while forcing all video hosting services to transcode their videos -- again -- to a lower-quality codec, all so that the handheld manufacturers don't have to pay for an h.264 license?
The quality isn't notiecably lower, and any cost is more than made up for due to the ever-increasing H.264 licensing costs.
Are you seriously suggesting looking at the branding on the About screen as a way to verify you have genuine Mozilla software?
I'm seriously suggesting that protecting a brand is a good thing for the consumer because the consumer will know that anything which uses that brand is from that company/organization. It's not just about the about screen, it's about the whole branding.
Most users already have some h.264 decoder, legally or otherwise -- all modern commercial OSes come with them. So there's no legitimate reason for Firefox to refuse to do this -- it's entirely Church of GNU people insisting that everything has to remain Free Software.
This is obviously nonsense. Mozilla is aiming to reach beyond the desktop. You won't be able to hook into a decoder on all those smaller platforms out there. You are arguing that H.264 should be able to dictate what devices people use! Also, H.264 licensing will only get more expensive in the future.
Mozilla's petty squabbling over their control of the Firefox name and logo is already ridiculous enough.
How is this petty and ridiculous? Mozilla needs to protect their logos and trademarks. That they are doing that also protects users because they know that if it says "Firefox", it will be a real Mozilla product. Organizations enforcing their trademarks is a good thing.
Mozilla needs to live in the real world, not just some fairy tale.
Slashdot Mirror
You can have or not have gestures in Opera as well. Everything is optional in Opera, and mostly disabled by default.
GreaseMonkey came after Opera's User JS. But GM is an optional extension anyway.
Really? I thought it always had XUL and Gecko...
What is that Biden video supposed to show? She's a moron. He isn't.
Again, the difference is that with Palin the idiocy is a constant pattern. With the other guys it's more of an exception.
Obama was clearly better qualitied than Palin, if nothing else because she is a stupid moron, while Obama is somewhat intelligent and able to think somewhat rationally.
Why would one not insult Sarah Palin? She is a stupid, ignorant and bigoted woman, and it's scary that she might be in a position of power. Hasn't done anything wrong? I guess being stupid, ignorant and bigoted isn't wrong, then...
Palin is just stupid and ignorant. What's dangerous is that a lot of people want to put her in charge.
Wow, another batshit insane conspiracy nut. Incoherent rambling and all.
Yeah, but there's "a bit biased", and then there's "batshit insane".
Where does it say anything about preventing people from thinking about anything? It clearly refers to countering dangerous ideologies (such as Muslims wanting to blow up buildings or Christians wanting to murder abortion doctors?).
Muslims flew planes into the Twin Towers. Christians are murdering abortion doctors. Yes, holding crazy beliefs can indeed be dangerous. Why should that be true for Christianity and Islam, but not conspiracy idiots?
Really? Source?
But isn't the market cap is a bit of wishful thinking and where people trading in shares think the company is heading? It isn't there right now.
It's probably correct that Nokia tried other things before suing. But claiming that the iPhone is not a raging success? The iPhone is just one phone. Nokia has dozens of them. How much does the best selling Nokia phone sell compared to the iPhone? The iPhone is a real threat to other phone manufacturers, I'd say.
I doubt you'll be looking at 5 fps, and still, 30 fps doesn't sound too bad. Just turn down the resolution a couple of notches in case of lag, and the problem is solved.
Yes, it's trivial to support Theora, not to mention no licensing costs. H.264 costs money today, and will cost even more from 2011.
As for content, duh. See what the actual Slashdot story is all about?
For Google, it's probably cheaper to pay slightly more for Theora storage than the outrageous cost of H.264 in the future.
The point with control is that smaller platforms/companies won't easily be able to pay the insane prices the owners are going to charge.
BTW, that last link of yours is from 2007. Using Theora 1.0. Epic fail on your part.
All you seem capable of is spreading FUD and lies against Theora.
And web browsers will use hardware acceleration.
30 fps at 1680x1050 sounds fucking amazing to me. I would probably just run it at 1200x1024 or something anyway. But when did 30 fps become bad?
But it's trivially easy to do. In fact, there's no license cost at all, and with major players like Mozilla on the desktop and mobile browser leader Opera pushing it in the mobile market, there's a real reason to support it.
Theora is more than good enough. And you are indeed arguing that private, commercial entities should be able to dictate what we use where. With closed, proprietary, costly technology like H.264, corporations are basically dictating what devices you are supposed to access online content from.
The quality isn't notiecably lower, and any cost is more than made up for due to the ever-increasing H.264 licensing costs.
I'm seriously suggesting that protecting a brand is a good thing for the consumer because the consumer will know that anything which uses that brand is from that company/organization. It's not just about the about screen, it's about the whole branding.
The encoder is frozen, but the decoder was released as 1.1 recently with massive quality improvements over 1.0. Or something like that.
This is obviously nonsense. Mozilla is aiming to reach beyond the desktop. You won't be able to hook into a decoder on all those smaller platforms out there. You are arguing that H.264 should be able to dictate what devices people use! Also, H.264 licensing will only get more expensive in the future.
The desktop browser is about 1/3 of Opera's total revenue. Opera's desktop revenue has more than doubled each quarter for the last few years.
Opera's "excuse" is that they have always been fighting for a open and patent-free web, and they intent to continue to do so, I guess.
Also the H.264 licensing costs are only going to increase in the coming years. They are already planning on charging more from 2011.
How is this petty and ridiculous? Mozilla needs to protect their logos and trademarks. That they are doing that also protects users because they know that if it says "Firefox", it will be a real Mozilla product. Organizations enforcing their trademarks is a good thing.
Mozilla needs to live in the real world, not just some fairy tale.