The new AJAXey discussion system here on Slashdot took forever to load on old versions of Firefox and Safari. New versions with enhanced JS engines are much faster for me.
That's interesting because it's as fast in Opera as in Chrome here. And Opera hasn't even released its "super fast" JS engine yet.
the new, fast JS engines make a huge difference in user experience
Sorry, but they don't. Not on today's sites. In a few years, on the other hand...
Why, certainly. Super fast JS will be great in the future. It's just that these benchmarks don't even come close to representing real-world performance today.
Re:It still fails at my simple CSS test.
on
Opera 10.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
Opera's focus on following standards often comes back to bite it in the ass.
No it doesn't. Opera was built from scratch for Opera 7 to be as compatible as possible. The standards compliance does not get in the way because it has stuff like quirks mode to handle badly coded site. It's a myth that Opera is so stuck up that it only accepts standards and refuses to handle actual sites. Most of the problems are caused by browser sniffing or sites relying on obscure bugs in specific browsers (most of the time IE and Firefox).
Re:It still fails at my simple CSS test.
on
Opera 10.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
Just because the markup is valid doesn't mean that it actually is valid the way you think it is. The W3C validators only look for certain things. This is why the HTML5 specification also includes error correction.
You are probably relying on undocumented bugs or quirks in certain browsers. No wonder other browsers are having problems if they don't implement those specific quirks in the exact same way.
Or is Google offering a 50/50 revenue split on search revenue? If so, how are other browsers going to compete with that? At best they can offer a 33/33/33 split.
They are leveraging it if they can offer a 50/50 revenue split, whereas other browsers would have to split it in 3 (browser vendor, OEM, search vendor)...
But why is Google getting these deals? I'm betting it is because the OEMs want some of that sweet search revenue from Google. Google is dominant in the online advertising market, and now they are using that dominance to get OEM deals to distribute Chrome.
Sounds a bit like Microsoft, doesn't it?
How are other browser vendors going to compete with Google here exactly? How can they possibly compete with Google's 50/50 revenue split? If Mozilla does this, they won't be able to offer more than a third for each party: Themselves, the OEM, and the search provider (likely Google). Is that a similar unfair advantage to Microsoft's operating system monopoly and the destruction of the browser market?
While Opera does have a lot of neat features, Google Gears support and the new fast Javascript engine haven't been released, these features do make web apps such as Gmai, Google Docs and Buxfer a lot better.
Sorry to disappoint you, but V8, Carakan, etc. are for nothing but bragging rights these days. Someone did an analysis. About 10% at most of CPU cycles were taken up by JavaScript even on sites like Gmail. The real performance gains on real sites today are not JavaScript at all.
Oh yes, there are equivalents. Also, Opera has NoScript built in, in the form of site specific settings.
Re:It still fails at my simple CSS test.
on
Opera 10.0 Released
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I'd love to use Opera more, but every version (including 10) seems to suffer from rendering issues that are often readily apparent on major websites that don't seem to affect any other browser.
That's because the other browsers aren't victims of browser sniffing the way Opera is. Most of the time you can simply mask as Firefox, and it "magically" starts working.
Re:Snappiest beast out there
on
Opera 10.0 Released
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
How is that possible? Opera Mini, for example, is a MIDP 2.0 (Java 2 Micro Edition) application, while the desktop Opera appears to be C/C++.
Opera Mini is just a thin application. The actual "browser", or the engine, runs on a server.
I suppose that Windows Mobile edition of Opera Mobile shares code with the desktop Opera browser (which is already coded to the Win32 API), but the Opera Mobile for the Symbian phones would almost certainly have to be Java, right?
Nope. They use the same engine (the biggest and most complex part of a browser), but not necessarily the same UI.
It's not like she exactly discourages the connection between her and sex, is it'? Their music video is highly suggestive, and she portrays herself as a sexually attractive woman. Can you blame geeks for being sexually attracted to her?
I suppose you could say that she should be able to portray herself as extremely sexy and into that sort of thing and still not have to be treated like this, but these are males we are talking about. Geeks, yes, but males. Any group of males would have reacted to her "invitation" to see her as a sex object, not just geeks.
Cue "this is why we don't have women around" debate in 3.. 2.. 1...
Did you watch the music video? This woman clearly made use of her "female attributes" in that video. If she didn't want women to be viewed that way, maybe she should have avoided turning herself (even more) into a sexually desirable object.
Yeah, because the US did all of that, all alone. It's not like a certan dictatorship in the east sacrificed millions of its own to "flood" the German forces, for example.
How could Apple possibly know what "end user experience" best suits me?
Well, you bought an Apple product, and they sell those with the promise of an "Apple user experience". It does make sense, if you think like Apple. Not that I think the argument should be considered valid, but that seems to be their attitude. "If you want just something thrown randomly together, get a Windows Mobile phone."
Wow. How insanely important! Really! That's REALLY important, you know! Um... So what if they have half? They don't have all of Apple's product lines. But if Palm Pre is successful and all that, wait and see.
In this case, there is absolutely no reason NOT to design them with...
Um, cost?
He is a communications droid that cannot do sign language and does not understand body language, nor communicate good body language
So what? If you need something translated, you want the words, not the body language.
Body language is 90% of all communciation
Yeah... What is my body language saying right now? Oh, you can't tell? Wow, 90% of my communication to you was just lost it seems! Looks like no one is really communicating over the internet, eh?
In other words, you're trying to do exactly what the author said Star Wars novelists have had to do - try to explain the poor design choices.
That's assuming that design choices in the real world are actually always good. But it isn't. Due to various limitations like cost, you often/usually have to make compromises.
Slashdot Mirror
That's interesting because it's as fast in Opera as in Chrome here. And Opera hasn't even released its "super fast" JS engine yet.
Sorry, but they don't. Not on today's sites. In a few years, on the other hand...
Why, certainly. Super fast JS will be great in the future. It's just that these benchmarks don't even come close to representing real-world performance today.
No it doesn't. Opera was built from scratch for Opera 7 to be as compatible as possible. The standards compliance does not get in the way because it has stuff like quirks mode to handle badly coded site. It's a myth that Opera is so stuck up that it only accepts standards and refuses to handle actual sites. Most of the problems are caused by browser sniffing or sites relying on obscure bugs in specific browsers (most of the time IE and Firefox).
Just because the markup is valid doesn't mean that it actually is valid the way you think it is. The W3C validators only look for certain things. This is why the HTML5 specification also includes error correction.
You are probably relying on undocumented bugs or quirks in certain browsers. No wonder other browsers are having problems if they don't implement those specific quirks in the exact same way.
Sorry, but this is something you are imagining. If Gmail is faster it is not because of JavaScript. It's as simple as that.
Or is Google offering a 50/50 revenue split on search revenue? If so, how are other browsers going to compete with that? At best they can offer a 33/33/33 split.
It is, according to the legal definition.
They are leveraging it if they can offer a 50/50 revenue split, whereas other browsers would have to split it in 3 (browser vendor, OEM, search vendor)...
No. Not likely.
But why is Google getting these deals? I'm betting it is because the OEMs want some of that sweet search revenue from Google. Google is dominant in the online advertising market, and now they are using that dominance to get OEM deals to distribute Chrome.
Sounds a bit like Microsoft, doesn't it?
How are other browser vendors going to compete with Google here exactly? How can they possibly compete with Google's 50/50 revenue split? If Mozilla does this, they won't be able to offer more than a third for each party: Themselves, the OEM, and the search provider (likely Google). Is that a similar unfair advantage to Microsoft's operating system monopoly and the destruction of the browser market?
Sorry to disappoint you, but V8, Carakan, etc. are for nothing but bragging rights these days. Someone did an analysis. About 10% at most of CPU cycles were taken up by JavaScript even on sites like Gmail. The real performance gains on real sites today are not JavaScript at all.
Oh yes, there are equivalents. Also, Opera has NoScript built in, in the form of site specific settings.
That's because the other browsers aren't victims of browser sniffing the way Opera is. Most of the time you can simply mask as Firefox, and it "magically" starts working.
Opera Mini is just a thin application. The actual "browser", or the engine, runs on a server.
Nope. They use the same engine (the biggest and most complex part of a browser), but not necessarily the same UI.
I suppose you could say that she should be able to portray herself as extremely sexy and into that sort of thing and still not have to be treated like this, but these are males we are talking about. Geeks, yes, but males. Any group of males would have reacted to her "invitation" to see her as a sex object, not just geeks.
Did you watch the music video? This woman clearly made use of her "female attributes" in that video. If she didn't want women to be viewed that way, maybe she should have avoided turning herself (even more) into a sexually desirable object.
And then Murdoch would simply buy them all. Oops.
Yeah, because the US did all of that, all alone. It's not like a certan dictatorship in the east sacrificed millions of its own to "flood" the German forces, for example.
He is? :)
How is TiVo a patent troll, exactly?
And your kids? Do they hear those screams? :o
Pic related.
Well, you bought an Apple product, and they sell those with the promise of an "Apple user experience". It does make sense, if you think like Apple. Not that I think the argument should be considered valid, but that seems to be their attitude. "If you want just something thrown randomly together, get a Windows Mobile phone."
Wow. How insanely important! Really! That's REALLY important, you know! Um... So what if they have half? They don't have all of Apple's product lines. But if Palm Pre is successful and all that, wait and see.
Apple fanboy much? :D
Um, cost?
So what? If you need something translated, you want the words, not the body language.
Yeah... What is my body language saying right now? Oh, you can't tell? Wow, 90% of my communication to you was just lost it seems! Looks like no one is really communicating over the internet, eh?
That's assuming that design choices in the real world are actually always good. But it isn't. Due to various limitations like cost, you often/usually have to make compromises.