Yes, we spent quite a bit of time attempting to configure it,
and eventually gave up. Anyhow, we have our own CMS now
(doesn't everyone:-?) which does some interesting stuff,
like integrating with Google Adwords, keyword suggestion,
reading age suggestion, SEO suggestions, etc.
Many CMSes (both open and closed source) fail on issues that really matter, like:
Not having stupid URLs like/cms.cgi?pageid=1234
Putting lots of <table>s in the layout rather than using semantic markup
Putting page content too late in the page so search engines have to work harder to find it, or generally being unfriendly to robots
Not setting page metadata usefully
Not including accessibility features like access keys, forcing ALT text, jump to navigation
Not providing stylesheets for different @media
Not integrating well with analysis tools so you can see where people are coming from, what they do, whether your visitors are going up or down, are they reading the pages you think they should be reading, etc.
Speed
Ease of configuration (hello, Plone)
Providing workflow which is either too difficult to set up, or too complicated to understand for the users, or over/under-kill for the requirements of the site
What's the difference between regular gas and this special
stuff? Does that mean when you buy a Ferrari you spend
half you life looking for Ferrari-approved filling stations?
I didn't realize Opera was still a player (very understood the "pay for a web browser" bit),
It's very much a player in mobile applications. I have no less than
three devices which were bundled with Opera, and for that Opera gets
money. For the same reason that the most popular chip is the
ARM (not x86 as most people would think), Opera might well become
the most popular browser by numbers if not by mindshare.
(The three devices are a Nokia phone, the Nokia 770 and an early Sharp Zaurus).
I work as a tester at a large, well-known tech company. I started using Vista back in February of this year, and I've used one of the latest versions, 5474, recently. Here are the changes I've seen:
[better graphics, crashes a bit less, more widgets, file copying is a bit faster]
Sounds like it was really worth spending more money than the
Apollo programme on then!
You've never heard of phrases like "Thatcher's Britain",
"Reaganomics", etc.
which refer to a political or economic movement whose figurehead
was a particular person, but that particular person was
not wholly responsible for every single detail?
I was playing around with a neural network simulator in C and OCaml the
other day, and was pleasantly surprised to find that the optimised OCaml version
was just 3% slower than the optimised C version (using gcc, so
perhaps the Intel compiler would have done better).
Go to any random person on the street and ask them if they've heard of Ubuntu. Dollars to donuts, they won't have.
True enough, but I think the real problem is familiarity.
People have a huge investment learning all the strangeness
of Windows and its applications. They didn't want to learn
it then, and they certainly don't want to learn it all over
again now.
The best thing to do, therefore, is to wait for the
older Windows users to die off[1], and find new Linux
users amongst young people and new users in the third
world.
Shame then that Linux on the desktop is still effectively a hardware support crapshoot.
Actually it supports ancient hardware like that quite well, because people
have had plenty of time to reverse engineer the hardware and debug
device drivers. Even old winmodems are
doing quite well.
The BBC was having a "Have Your Say" discussion about this, and
no one was talking about Linux at all.
The closest it got to talking about
alternatives was someone sarcasticly
saying they should go back to Windows 3.1...
It seems that even giving away free Ubuntu CDs
containing such a great OS isn't enough to get
through to the general population.
Rich.
(PS. That discussion link just stopped working, but I expect
it'll be back up shortly).
That's probably more Netscape's fault than the parallel project's fault. If Apple can maintain a parallel x86 compatible version of their entire OS for five years in secret, then a parallel browser version should be a piece of cake.
While you're right that Netscape's resources and internal organisation couldn't support parallel projects (read JWZ's articles passim), it's not fair to compare this to Mac OS X on PPC and x86. The part of Mac OS X that really depends on architecture is not so significant. Look at Linux and compare how much is in arch/ compared to everything else.
Or if you prefer, consider that almost all Debian packages run on about 8+ different architectures, but most developers have access to at most one or two architectures.
Microsoft shouldn't have any problems starting a second Internet Explorer project to rewrite the entire codebase in C#.
The "Javagator" project - a parallel project at Netscape to completely rewrite Netscape Navigator in Java - is one commonly cited reason why Netscape failed.
It's a huge issue - it defines how much space on your memory card/hard drive you'll need for your images, and how inconvenient it's going to be sending them over a network.
Not really. Digital cameras routinely come with 0.5 or 1 GB memory
cards in them, enough to take over 500 photos - that'll nicely cover
a two week holiday.
Let's imagine that the digital camera makers
start to implement MS's proprietary format (not that they would -
they're already not chuffed about having to pay to cover the bogus
patents in the FAT format). It'll be at least 2007 before Vista
comes to market and anyone could actually use the new format, and
by then cameras will routinely use 1-4 GB memory cards, enough to get
you through that 3 month sabattical to the South Pole. Now
you can store twice as many photos? So what?
Slashdot Mirror
Bill Gates, who may be planning his own video hosting service
I'm not too sure I want to see any of Bill Gates's own videos, thanks very much ...
Rich.
Rich.
Rich.
The eight balls like they used for attitude control on Apollo and on the old shuttle are gone.
Is it safe to launch now?
Rich.
++++1 funny
Rich.
Yes, we spent quite a bit of time attempting to configure it, and eventually gave up. Anyhow, we have our own CMS now (doesn't everyone :-?) which does some interesting stuff,
like integrating with Google Adwords, keyword suggestion,
reading age suggestion, SEO suggestions, etc.
Rich.
Many CMSes (both open and closed source) fail on issues that really matter, like:
Rich.
What's the difference between regular gas and this special stuff? Does that mean when you buy a Ferrari you spend half you life looking for Ferrari-approved filling stations?
(These are serious questions ...)
Rich.
I didn't realize Opera was still a player (very understood the "pay for a web browser" bit),
It's very much a player in mobile applications. I have no less than three devices which were bundled with Opera, and for that Opera gets money. For the same reason that the most popular chip is the ARM (not x86 as most people would think), Opera might well become the most popular browser by numbers if not by mindshare.
(The three devices are a Nokia phone, the Nokia 770 and an early Sharp Zaurus).
Rich.
I work as a tester at a large, well-known tech company. I started using Vista back in February of this year, and I've used one of the latest versions, 5474, recently. Here are the changes I've seen:
[better graphics, crashes a bit less, more widgets, file copying is a bit faster]
Sounds like it was really worth spending more money than the Apollo programme on then!
Rich.
You've never heard of phrases like "Thatcher's Britain", "Reaganomics", etc. which refer to a political or economic movement whose figurehead was a particular person, but that particular person was not wholly responsible for every single detail?
Sad.
Rich.
The irony is that most people actually seem to think ASBOs are a good thing.
Rich.
Thread on OCaml-beginners newsgroup here.
Rich.
Go to any random person on the street and ask them if they've heard of Ubuntu. Dollars to donuts, they won't have.
True enough, but I think the real problem is familiarity. People have a huge investment learning all the strangeness of Windows and its applications. They didn't want to learn it then, and they certainly don't want to learn it all over again now.
The best thing to do, therefore, is to wait for the older Windows users to die off[1], and find new Linux users amongst young people and new users in the third world.
Rich.
[1] By old age of course :-)
Shame then that Linux on the desktop is still effectively a hardware support crapshoot.
Actually it supports ancient hardware like that quite well, because people have had plenty of time to reverse engineer the hardware and debug device drivers. Even old winmodems are doing quite well.
Rich.
Rich.
(PS. That discussion link just stopped working, but I expect it'll be back up shortly).
Rich.
What are the chances of this being simply an excuse to generate a $2.5 million per day revenue stream for the EU government?
Errrm, none? There is no "EU government" - perhaps you meant intergovernmental European Union, or the European Council, Commission or Parliament?
The EU has a budget of over 1% of the European GDP (works out at around US$ 160 billion). Why would they want $2.5m/day?
Rich.
That's probably more Netscape's fault than the parallel project's fault. If Apple can maintain a parallel x86 compatible version of their entire OS for five years in secret, then a parallel browser version should be a piece of cake.
While you're right that Netscape's resources and internal organisation couldn't support parallel projects (read JWZ's articles passim), it's not fair to compare this to Mac OS X on PPC and x86. The part of Mac OS X that really depends on architecture is not so significant. Look at Linux and compare how much is in arch/ compared to everything else. Or if you prefer, consider that almost all Debian packages run on about 8+ different architectures, but most developers have access to at most one or two architectures.
Rich.
Microsoft shouldn't have any problems starting a second Internet Explorer project to rewrite the entire codebase in C#.
The "Javagator" project - a parallel project at Netscape to completely rewrite Netscape Navigator in Java - is one commonly cited reason why Netscape failed.
There's some notes about that on this page.
Rich.
Mod me redundant ...
Rich.
As in:
(Call from somewhere in Europe): Hi Mom, great news, it's a baby boy!
(Multiple calls to relatives in US): Hey [mother/sister/brother/uncle/aunt], Jeff and Jane have just had a baby boy!
(Next day): FBI! We have the place surrounded! Come out with your hands up!
Rich.
http://haxe.org/intro
Rich.
It's a huge issue - it defines how much space on your memory card/hard drive you'll need for your images, and how inconvenient it's going to be sending them over a network.
Not really. Digital cameras routinely come with 0.5 or 1 GB memory cards in them, enough to take over 500 photos - that'll nicely cover a two week holiday.
Let's imagine that the digital camera makers start to implement MS's proprietary format (not that they would - they're already not chuffed about having to pay to cover the bogus patents in the FAT format). It'll be at least 2007 before Vista comes to market and anyone could actually use the new format, and by then cameras will routinely use 1-4 GB memory cards, enough to get you through that 3 month sabattical to the South Pole. Now you can store twice as many photos? So what?
Rich.