Traitor.;-) You should have recommended the Amiga.
I did try, every chance I got. But purchasing had to be done through their official channels, if it wasn't on the official supply list, we weren't allowed to get it. I did however create the graphs used in the photos on their annual report one year using Deluxe Paint III on my Amiga 2000 at home. And I was far too junior to be involved in changing decisions made much higher up.
Also it was extremely difficult to multitask.
Don't forget multitasking, at the time, was seen as a "power user" option only. We'd experimented with all sorts of crap such as dos-based task switchers (remember Desqview 386?) but it was regarded that most people didn't want or need multitasking. They wrote a letter in Wordstar 4, then they loaded Lotus 1-2-3 to do their spreadsheets. Do both at the same time? that was far too confusing for "normal" people. I know it sounds silly now, but that was genuinely what IT management thought back in those days. The only reason we looked at Windows at all was to see if the mouse/gui system could improve productivity and reduce training costs associated with application use.
I remember going to a big computer show in early 1990 up in Birmingham. This was just before the Windows 3.0 announcement, so the Microsoft booth had a secret area inside it where they were showing the product to invited guests. As a dedicated Amiga fanatic at the time, I wasn't entirely impressed with it - however I did go back and recommend to my employer at the time (BP - no I don't work for them any more) that they should start looking into Windows again (we'd discounted Windows 2.x for widespread deployment).
Commodore used the same show to preview the Amiga 3000 computer, which was far more exciting to me, and I put my order in a couple of days after!
Is at least be creative in your phone conversations.
For example, when answering a call on my phone in a public place, always start the conversation with "Is this a secure line?"
Regardless as to whether you then go on talking about the weather or reading out your shopping list, casual eavesdroppers will find it gripping and won't complain.
Go to every book you own, highlight the first 'F', the first 'U' after this, the first 'C' after this , the first 'K' after this , then first 'A', then 'M', then 'A', then 'Z'.... you get the idea.
2 year protection = normal price 5 year protection = three times normal price 10 year protection = ten times normal price 20 year protection = fifty times normal price
>Any standard on the web should be completely free, period.
Totally agree, and it's a disgrace that HTML5 won't specify a free codec as mandatory for VIDEO.
> The best free standard we have so far is HTML5 + Ogg + Theora
Correct, and in an ideal world that would be what we would all be using. But it simply won't happen. With hardware H.264 decoding in portable devices NOW that people want to use, Theora is the least-best solution technically. And don't forget Microsoft and Apple wouldn't support Theora in a million years. They finally have some leverage over Firefox and the open source community, and they'll exploit it however they can.
The battle is already lost on Theora. In exactly the same way that MP3 became the standard for audio and OGG audio lost. Sure, Wikipedia has Theora video, but Youtube doesn't, and won't.
Website developers have to be able to figure out how to support video on all devices and browsers. At the moment H.264 is the only solution that can do that, or can realistically be expected to do so in the future. It's the only format with hardware support, it's the only one that works on smart phones, it can work with Firefox if you use a Flash video player to play the content.
The real battle is not about Theora or H.264, the real battle is to kill software patents completely. Then all these issues become irrelevant.
... because the threat of possible attacks (thanks, Steve) is enough to keep the people who matter from adopting it.
From my point of view, as a website developer I really have no intention of doing ANYTHING with HTML5 video until this whole mess has been resolved, and we can encode in one format that works with IE, Firefox, Safari, etc. Sadly I suspect that's going to have to mean H.264, I've no idea how Firefox are going to be able to support it, but support it they must if they dont' want to go the way of Netscape Navigator (and Firefox is my browser of choice, so I really dislike having to say this).
I remember some idiot many years ago here on slashdot left a comment saying "The lack of Ogg support is going to kill the IPod". I replied, quite correctly, that he'd got it wrong, and the lack of IPod support was going to kill Ogg. It's not quite the same state of affairs now with H.264 vs Theora, but it's not far off. H.264 is so far ahead in terms of adoption and hardware support that no-one smart is betting on Theora winning.
Finally they've seen sense and will switch to the metric ten-bit byte.
I'm fed up of this short-changing every time I use a byte! I'm sure the memory companies will harp on about how it will increase costs by 25% but they've had an easy life for years.
If God had meant us to program with 8 bits per byte, he'd have given us 8 fingers.
"In a follow-up statement, the China Film Group explained that they could not ban the 3D version of Avatar because it was 'too fucking awesome'. They also explained that they were re-shooting the Biopic of Confucious in 3D, and in this 3D version, Chow Yun Fat plays the title role as a 12-foot smurf."
1. belief that nothing of significant importance is being transmitted via HTTP anyway.
2. complication/expense of setting up secure certificates. It's much cheaper than it used to be, but it's still quite complicated to install on your average server. Wildcard certificates are still a lot more expensive than they need to be (can anyone explain why these are so much more expensive - other than "because they can get away with charging that")
3. inability for HTTPS to work with shared IP addresses. This is probably the major factor, many websites run as vhosts on the same IP, which is great for reducing our 'IP4 footprint' but not very good for HTTPS.
4. Performance is obviously lower for HTTPS than HTTP, so for popular websites the hosting cost differences can be significant. Probably why google has put off shifting gmail to HTTPS for so long...
None of these are justifications for NOT using HTTPS, just the usual problems I come up with when trying to persuade clients to switch to HTTPS.
Slashdot Mirror
if(bar_count3) barcount=3;
".... something we'll all benefit from. The company's patented design ...."
Something's wrong there.
".... something MICROSOFT will benefit from. The company's patented design ..."
There. Fixed it for you.
He's the guy who created 'Dragon's Lair', you idiot!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon's_Lair
Oh.... wait....
Mmm... those smells are helping me relax, putting me in a happy place. Now gimme my damn steak.
Bu) I l/ved in thE day oI the 2400 baUUUd modem.
> Obviously you don't work in IT
Not any more, I got a real job! :)
Traitor. ;-) You should have recommended the Amiga.
I did try, every chance I got. But purchasing had to be done through their official channels, if it wasn't on the official supply list, we weren't allowed to get it. I did however create the graphs used in the photos on their annual report one year using Deluxe Paint III on my Amiga 2000 at home. And I was far too junior to be involved in changing decisions made much higher up.
Also it was extremely difficult to multitask.
Don't forget multitasking, at the time, was seen as a "power user" option only. We'd experimented with all sorts of crap such as dos-based task switchers (remember Desqview 386?) but it was regarded that most people didn't want or need multitasking. They wrote a letter in Wordstar 4, then they loaded Lotus 1-2-3 to do their spreadsheets. Do both at the same time? that was far too confusing for "normal" people. I know it sounds silly now, but that was genuinely what IT management thought back in those days. The only reason we looked at Windows at all was to see if the mouse/gui system could improve productivity and reduce training costs associated with application use.
Jolyon
I remember going to a big computer show in early 1990 up in Birmingham. This was just before the Windows 3.0 announcement, so the Microsoft booth had a secret area inside it where they were showing the product to invited guests. As a dedicated Amiga fanatic at the time, I wasn't entirely impressed with it - however I did go back and recommend to my employer at the time (BP - no I don't work for them any more) that they should start looking into Windows again (we'd discounted Windows 2.x for widespread deployment).
Commodore used the same show to preview the Amiga 3000 computer, which was far more exciting to me, and I put my order in a couple of days after!
Jolyon
Is at least be creative in your phone conversations.
For example, when answering a call on my phone in a public place, always start the conversation with "Is this a secure line?"
Regardless as to whether you then go on talking about the weather or reading out your shopping list, casual eavesdroppers will find it gripping and won't complain.
Jolyon
Go to every book you own, highlight the first 'F', the first 'U' after this, the first 'C' after this , the first 'K' after this , then first 'A', then 'M', then 'A', then 'Z'.... you get the idea.
Steve, why do you keep posting these messages anonymously?
it's complete bollocks.
Steve HATES Adobe.
You're more likely to get Steve Jobs to prove at the next Apple Keynote that he really can shit rainbows. "One more thing....."
2 year protection = normal price
5 year protection = three times normal price
10 year protection = ten times normal price
20 year protection = fifty times normal price
You're right, but you're also very wrong.
>Any standard on the web should be completely free, period.
Totally agree, and it's a disgrace that HTML5 won't specify a free codec as mandatory for VIDEO.
> The best free standard we have so far is HTML5 + Ogg + Theora
Correct, and in an ideal world that would be what we would all be using. But it simply won't happen. With hardware H.264 decoding in portable devices NOW that people want to use, Theora is the least-best solution technically. And don't forget Microsoft and Apple wouldn't support Theora in a million years. They finally have some leverage over Firefox and the open source community, and they'll exploit it however they can.
The battle is already lost on Theora. In exactly the same way that MP3 became the standard for audio and OGG audio lost. Sure, Wikipedia has Theora video, but Youtube doesn't, and won't.
Website developers have to be able to figure out how to support video on all devices and browsers. At the moment H.264 is the only solution that can do that, or can realistically be expected to do so in the future. It's the only format with hardware support, it's the only one that works on smart phones, it can work with Firefox if you use a Flash video player to play the content.
The real battle is not about Theora or H.264, the real battle is to kill software patents completely. Then all these issues become irrelevant.
Jolyon
... because the threat of possible attacks (thanks, Steve) is enough to keep the people who matter from adopting it.
From my point of view, as a website developer I really have no intention of doing ANYTHING with HTML5 video until this whole mess has been resolved, and we can encode in one format that works with IE, Firefox, Safari, etc. Sadly I suspect that's going to have to mean H.264, I've no idea how Firefox are going to be able to support it, but support it they must if they dont' want to go the way of Netscape Navigator (and Firefox is my browser of choice, so I really dislike having to say this).
I remember some idiot many years ago here on slashdot left a comment saying "The lack of Ogg support is going to kill the IPod". I replied, quite correctly, that he'd got it wrong, and the lack of IPod support was going to kill Ogg. It's not quite the same state of affairs now with H.264 vs Theora, but it's not far off. H.264 is so far ahead in terms of adoption and hardware support that no-one smart is betting on Theora winning.
Sounds like they might be!
Hiding will never work :)
There is quite a difference between http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mustard_(condiment) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_mustard (or mustard gas).
Whoosh.... :)
But thank you for pointing this out for the benefit of our American audience.
Finally they've seen sense and will switch to the metric ten-bit byte.
I'm fed up of this short-changing every time I use a byte! I'm sure the memory companies will harp on about how it will increase costs by 25% but they've had an easy life for years.
If God had meant us to program with 8 bits per byte, he'd have given us 8 fingers.
Well, we still don't know exactly why the Higg's Boson went back in time to freak out the Mayans in such a big way...
However, if it's shutting down in late 2011 for 12 months, guess what it will back in operation just in time for!
Jolyon
"In a follow-up statement, the China Film Group explained that they could not ban the 3D version of Avatar because it was 'too fucking awesome'. They also explained that they were re-shooting the Biopic of Confucious in 3D, and in this 3D version, Chow Yun Fat plays the title role as a 12-foot smurf."
buggeration!
At least it was posted securely
In my experience this is down to
1. belief that nothing of significant importance is being transmitted via HTTP anyway.
2. complication/expense of setting up secure certificates. It's much cheaper than it used to be, but it's still quite complicated to install on your average server. Wildcard certificates are still a lot more expensive than they need to be (can anyone explain why these are so much more expensive - other than "because they can get away with charging that")
3. inability for HTTPS to work with shared IP addresses. This is probably the major factor, many websites run as vhosts on the same IP, which is great for reducing our 'IP4 footprint' but not very good for HTTPS.
4. Performance is obviously lower for HTTPS than HTTP, so for popular websites the hosting cost differences can be significant. Probably why google has put off shifting gmail to HTTPS for so long...
None of these are justifications for NOT using HTTPS, just the usual problems I come up with when trying to persuade clients to switch to HTTPS.
Jolyon