Yes, you should test your page on Internet Explorer. But you can't blame the W3C for Internet Explorer's deficiencies, can you? My point was that we're waiting around for Microsoft to support HTML5 in IE, not waiting for the W3C to do something.
Yes, of course, but we can't blame the W3C for deficiencies in Internet Explorer, now can we? If we're waiting on Internet Explorer to catch up, we should blame Microsoft for lagging behind.
IE8 was released last year and passes Acid2. IE9 will be released soon, and it performs much better than IE8 on Acid3 (the latest preview scores 83/100). Yes, they are still lagging behind, but they're at least trying to keep up with the pack.
Why wait? I use HTML5 today. I start documents with and code away. The W3C validator even validates HTML5 documents. What are you waiting for? Maybe for Internet Explorer, but that's Microsoft's responsibility to update.
I thought the goal was finding the truth. What does impeaching a scientist have to do with anything? If there's a flaw in something a scientist said, explain what the flaw is.
They did publish their papers, and no one seems to be able to find any fundamental flaw in them. The data they used is publicly available for anyone else to analyze. What's your point?
So if you write a program, you should be allowed to sell only one copy of the software? If you write a book, you should be allowed to sell only one physical book? If you develop a drug, you should be allowed to sell only one prescription?
You left out ::grumble grumble:: Slow ::grumble grumble:: Crashes ::grumble grumble:: Freezes ::grumble grumble:: Security vulnerabilities ::grumble grumble:: Too many updates ::grumble grumble:: Too few updates ::grumble grumble:: Smells funny
Yes, for a short contract position, you would want someone who knows the exact skills involved in the position. For full-time jobs where you would expect employees to stay for a year or more, the exact skill set is much less important. You also wouldn't want to hire a really smart guy with no programming experience at all for a programming position, because it takes years to become a decent programmer. It takes only weeks to months to become proficient at a new programming language, though.
IQ is highly correlated to job performance, especially for skilled jobs. I wish it were a standard part of resumes, instead of the usual X years of experience with language Y. I'd get interviews on all jobs I applied for, instead of being weeded out by HR immediately because I don't specifically have 3 years experience with Python or 5 years experience with SQL.
People regularly run Firefox for weeks and they report that that doesn't happen. Try setting up some sort of automated test that demonstrates Firefox using more memory than other browsers when they run the test. The funny thing is that when people run such tests, they seem to find that Firefox uses less memory than other browsers.
Yes, but you obviously don't check the memory usage as he does, I have used many tabs and left firefox open for days on end as well, and have noticed taskmanager slowly climbing while FF is open, showing no signs of stopping,
Every browser does that. I suppose you either don't use other browsers or don't watch the memory usage like a hawk when using those browsers, so you don't notice.
It's fine to criticize it, but I notice no one is pointing out any specific problems that can be confirmed as Firefox bugs. It's always anecdotes about "memory leaks" and crashes ad vague claims about "bloat", and no one ever gives instructions for how to reproduce the problem. If your assertion is that Firefox is half-assed product, what is a specific problem that we can all see?
Why has Mozilla Foundation avoided fixing the biggest bugs in Firefox, the memory leaks? Many, many people have complained about the memory leaks for the last 5 years, at least, as did the parent comment.
They did fix the memory leaks. I have seen test after test that shows that Firefox uses less memory than other browsers. If you think you see a memory leak, explain how we could all see the problem. Then we can file a bug report and the problem can be fixed.
But wait, we're talking about software - an industry where standard procedure is to release shit and have the customer find all the bugs and faults that testing didn't.
What would one of these bugs or flaws be, specifically, in Firefox? I see very vague complaints about "memory leaks" or "bloat" but never, ever any specific problem that others can plainly see. Why is that?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, you should test your page on Internet Explorer. But you can't blame the W3C for Internet Explorer's deficiencies, can you? My point was that we're waiting around for Microsoft to support HTML5 in IE, not waiting for the W3C to do something.
Yes, of course, but we can't blame the W3C for deficiencies in Internet Explorer, now can we? If we're waiting on Internet Explorer to catch up, we should blame Microsoft for lagging behind.
IE8 was released last year and passes Acid2. IE9 will be released soon, and it performs much better than IE8 on Acid3 (the latest preview scores 83/100). Yes, they are still lagging behind, but they're at least trying to keep up with the pack.
Why wait? I use HTML5 today. I start documents with and code away. The W3C validator even validates HTML5 documents. What are you waiting for? Maybe for Internet Explorer, but that's Microsoft's responsibility to update.
I thought the goal was finding the truth. What does impeaching a scientist have to do with anything? If there's a flaw in something a scientist said, explain what the flaw is.
I thought that's what the email hackers tried to do to Jones and Mann. Maybe you're reading the story right to left or bottom to top.
They did publish their papers, and no one seems to be able to find any fundamental flaw in them. The data they used is publicly available for anyone else to analyze. What's your point?
Question: What is the purpose of China's One Child Policy is to decrease the Chinese population?
Answer: To decrease the Chinese population.
The Chinese population has nearly doubled since the One Child Policy started.
But one has to wonder What would the population be today had there been no One Child Policy?
Critical thinking: It's more that a knee-jerk reaction based on a sound bite.
Yeah, don't they know energy is always conserved? How could we ever run out?
So if you write a program, you should be allowed to sell only one copy of the software? If you write a book, you should be allowed to sell only one physical book? If you develop a drug, you should be allowed to sell only one prescription?
Yeah, I buy that argument. I installed a splitter to watch my neighbor's cable TV, 'cause their friends bully my kid. Seems perfectly fair to me!
Why wouldn't some other search engine pay to be the default search engine in Firefox?
You left out
::grumble grumble:: Slow
::grumble grumble:: Crashes
::grumble grumble:: Freezes
::grumble grumble:: Security vulnerabilities
::grumble grumble:: Too many updates
::grumble grumble:: Too few updates
::grumble grumble:: Smells funny
Tall people already receive higher salaries than short people. It's probably easier for them to get a job, too.
Yes, for a short contract position, you would want someone who knows the exact skills involved in the position. For full-time jobs where you would expect employees to stay for a year or more, the exact skill set is much less important. You also wouldn't want to hire a really smart guy with no programming experience at all for a programming position, because it takes years to become a decent programmer. It takes only weeks to months to become proficient at a new programming language, though.
IQ is highly correlated to job performance, especially for skilled jobs. I wish it were a standard part of resumes, instead of the usual X years of experience with language Y. I'd get interviews on all jobs I applied for, instead of being weeded out by HR immediately because I don't specifically have 3 years experience with Python or 5 years experience with SQL.
NTP has been around for decades. Even Windows phones home for the time every so often.
That's what Firefox has done since version 1.5, when they implemented the back/forward cache (bfcache).
People regularly run Firefox for weeks and they report that that doesn't happen. Try setting up some sort of automated test that demonstrates Firefox using more memory than other browsers when they run the test. The funny thing is that when people run such tests, they seem to find that Firefox uses less memory than other browsers.
Every browser does that. I suppose you either don't use other browsers or don't watch the memory usage like a hawk when using those browsers, so you don't notice.
It's fine to criticize it, but I notice no one is pointing out any specific problems that can be confirmed as Firefox bugs. It's always anecdotes about "memory leaks" and crashes ad vague claims about "bloat", and no one ever gives instructions for how to reproduce the problem. If your assertion is that Firefox is half-assed product, what is a specific problem that we can all see?
It seems like he's being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative to me. Whatever.
They did fix the memory leaks. I have seen test after test that shows that Firefox uses less memory than other browsers. If you think you see a memory leak, explain how we could all see the problem. Then we can file a bug report and the problem can be fixed.
What would one of these bugs or flaws be, specifically, in Firefox? I see very vague complaints about "memory leaks" or "bloat" but never, ever any specific problem that others can plainly see. Why is that?
Boy, I wish you luck finding that fight you're looking for.