I think part of the problem is that when a new product arrives, there's no existing user base to piss off with any features you do or don't have. Typically a product starts out with a basic set of features, and gradually stuff gets added. In Firefox's case, features have _mostly_ been added via extension. So that's all fine.
But I think the "too timid, passive and consensus-driven" comment must've related to the whole Firefox UI which has had a bunch of mockups floating around for ages.
I think, if they just released a new browser, lets call it DonkeyBalls. It can have a new, even more slimmed down UI like Chrome does. It can be based on Gecko, so pretty much all the same bits behind the scenes. And it could ditch the old extensions mechanism and use Jetpack instead.
This would allow Mozilla to not annoy existing Firefox users, whilst pushing forward with a new Gecko based product. But.... maybe they wouldn't want to dilute their user-base, because then the Firefox market share goes down?
[I'm rambling now]... but this is pretty much what they already did when they first released Pheonix^H^H^H^H^H^H Firebird^H^H^H^H^H^H Firefox.
I can only think that somewhere in the decision-making process were *industry* bodies who still need a steady flow of VB6 programmers to maintain existing code. I can't see any other reason to choose VB6!
Having used Linux for a couple years now, I know that rebuilding your Linux machine is a monthly occurrence up until a year or so ago, and now it's every few months.
(My emphasis)
Erm.... you sure about that?!! There's a number of things Linux could be criticised for, but the need to rebuild really isn't one of them.
I don't understand exactly how all this hangs together, but since Adobe open-sourced the Tamarin VM, would it be possible for Flash to instead use Chromes V8 engine? And if so, then Flash would benefit from performance improvements courtesy of Google.
And... (and this is the biggie)... since Apple have already allowed Opera with it's own JavaScript engine**, and Apple already include their own JS engine, what excuse could they give not to allow Chrome+Flash on iPhone|iPad|iPod?
It's clear [to me anyway] that Google are including Flash not to piss Apple off, but to (1). ensure stability of Chrome Browser and by extension, Android and ChromeOS, and (2). to make it easier for OEMs to include Android/ChromeOS as well as Flash and have everything manage updates automatically.
Since Google is doing all the leg-work to make Flash fast and stable, this would seem to address all of Steve Jobs'es issues with Flash.
I predict fun interesting times ahead!:D
**except... as I'm writing this, I've just remembered that Opera on iPhone is Opera Mini, and I'm not 100% sure that does include any JS engine?
FWIW, I've tried resynth and the "pole" picture looked pretty much the same as CS5 when I tried it, so I'm guessing the author of TFA made a poor selection. I've also previously tried the image from the CS5 promo video with the woman sat on the park bench and I got almost much identical results.
The only area where I'd say Gimp lags is (1). the UI isn't as easy [both for this plugin, and more generally], and (2). the plugin only makes use of a single CPU core.
I don't know if CS5 make use of multiple cores... it bloody should do given the price though!;)
For the record, I'm getting results from gimp-resynth that are similar to the CS5 results. I just used "Free select tool" [aka lasso] to quickly select *around* the outside of the pole -- being careful not to select anything within the pole -- and then used "Filter->Enhance->Smart remove selection..." and it does a pretty good job. One thing I have noticed with Resynth is that if you undo it and then reapply it (NOT redo), then it'll probably look a bit different from the first attempt, so there's a random element in the algorithm there somewhere! Does anyone know if CS5 does the same?
I installed it pretty easy under Ubuntu (9.10):
$ sudo apt-get install gimp-resynthesizer
However, when I first tried using it, I was using the Filter->Map->Resynthesize... menu option which kind of works, but isn't so great. I had to google to find a good explanation of how to use it. What you should do is:
1. Install as above,
2. Select area of image to remove,
3. Use Filters->Enhance->Smart remove selection...
And to be clear about this - it is fucking awesome. Seriously! I'm not usually _that_ impressed with things (I'm far too old!), but this goes into total witch-craft territory, it is *that* good!
If anyone has managed to install this plugin under Windows, I'd like to know the instructions for doing so (not for me... it's for my *friends*... honest!!!).
Not saying they would do anything like that... but I'm guessing Steve Jobs would be most angry about such a situation, and it's entirely possible that the thought would cross his mind. Maybe. So Gizmodo could have actually *saved* a young man's life.:D
You'd think so.... but possibly not. And this might also account for being able to reduce the size of everything *and* probably improve power usage too.
I think even with older iPhones/iPods they've had funny serial numbers on chips that are similar to, but not quite the same as other off-the-shelf components, making it not entirely clear what they are.
With iPhone/iPodTouch OS v1 you had to use the desktop iTunes to install apps. Since v2 (or maybe v3... I can't remember), you can install apps directly onto the iPhone/Touch.
It used to be very squared off... like a tin-can moving up and down in a tube, so no more phallic that a piston in an engine. But the new one is.... I dunno... ends in a point and has various sculpted features... for more pleasure! Or something. It did look very dodgy to me.:O
lol @ Pegg! Anyway, he was the editor... sorry, [ahem] The Editoorrr!
When they were throwing around ideas for who the new Doctor would be, Paterson Joseph seemed the best choice to me, so I was a bit worried when they picked some 16 year old kid. But, having seen the first episode, I have to admit that Matt Smith was really, very very good.
Obviously I'm not privy to Palms motivations here, but as a Linux user I can't help noticing that none of Apples aledged "openness" actually helps me sync my iPod Touch. AFAIK I can only sync it if I jail break it, at which point I have to dick around any time I want to upgrade the firmware. This happens because Apple only want people to sync the iPod/iPhone via their software on their terms.
I guess they're entitled to do so... but it also means that any products that hook into iTunes via the "well documented method" will also suffer from all of it's limitations, *and* will be subject to Apple's whims -- which given Apple's recent behaviour regarding iPhone apps, is... well... a bit shitty.
I guess the only other thing you could do to ensure security (aside from writing your own client extension) is use Chrome rather than Firefox since (AFAIK) Chrome provides better protection between extensions.
Why is this knee-jerk negative reaction every time cloud computing is mentioned on Slashdot?
Probably because the idea of moving computing into a "cloud" isn't that new, and the "cloud" is getting more and more mention in the mainstream press, and at that point PHBs "understand" it *and* it simultaneously becomes a useful word for marketing to use.
Plus, MS bragging about how much they spend "researching" something... blah blah "innovation" blah... is really a press release which is itself used by marketing to make something seem important. I'd venture that a fair chunk of that 9 billion is going to be marketing research rather than anything technical!
AFAIK MS do/did/are/where doing a deal to UK education authorities whereby a fixed fee is paid per computer regardless of what it actually runs. The deal being that if you already use a bunch of MS software, this could work out cheaper for you.... but of course, it also means it will never be worth trying to use anything other than MS because it will always cost more.
Chrome was a bit of a crap name too. Any time I'm searching for something chrome related, I wind up with Firefox pages since they cover the same topics along with the word "chrome". It's bleedin' annoying, that's what it is!!!:D
But Google aren't targeting tablets with Android -- that's more where Chrome OS might exist. Although Google have said that Chrome OS and Android may converge in the future.
Didn't this only happen because it turned out that the "secret" information had already been made public by a US court? So the whole "we don't want to upset the Americans" thing was kind of moot, and made it an easy decision. If that hadn't been the case, I'm not certain which way it would've gone!
Slashdot Mirror
I think part of the problem is that when a new product arrives, there's no existing user base to piss off with any features you do or don't have. Typically a product starts out with a basic set of features, and gradually stuff gets added. In Firefox's case, features have _mostly_ been added via extension. So that's all fine.
But I think the "too timid, passive and consensus-driven" comment must've related to the whole Firefox UI which has had a bunch of mockups floating around for ages.
I think, if they just released a new browser, lets call it DonkeyBalls. It can have a new, even more slimmed down UI like Chrome does. It can be based on Gecko, so pretty much all the same bits behind the scenes. And it could ditch the old extensions mechanism and use Jetpack instead.
This would allow Mozilla to not annoy existing Firefox users, whilst pushing forward with a new Gecko based product. But.... maybe they wouldn't want to dilute their user-base, because then the Firefox market share goes down?
[I'm rambling now]... but this is pretty much what they already did when they first released Pheonix^H^H^H^H^H^H Firebird^H^H^H^H^H^H Firefox.
I can only think that somewhere in the decision-making process were *industry* bodies who still need a steady flow of VB6 programmers to maintain existing code. I can't see any other reason to choose VB6!
Having used Linux for a couple years now, I know that rebuilding your Linux machine is a monthly occurrence up until a year or so ago , and now it's every few months.
(My emphasis)
Erm.... you sure about that?!! There's a number of things Linux could be criticised for, but the need to rebuild really isn't one of them.
I don't understand exactly how all this hangs together, but since Adobe open-sourced the Tamarin VM, would it be possible for Flash to instead use Chromes V8 engine? And if so, then Flash would benefit from performance improvements courtesy of Google.
:D
And... (and this is the biggie)... since Apple have already allowed Opera with it's own JavaScript engine**, and Apple already include their own JS engine, what excuse could they give not to allow Chrome+Flash on iPhone|iPad|iPod?
It's clear [to me anyway] that Google are including Flash not to piss Apple off, but to (1). ensure stability of Chrome Browser and by extension, Android and ChromeOS, and (2). to make it easier for OEMs to include Android/ChromeOS as well as Flash and have everything manage updates automatically.
Since Google is doing all the leg-work to make Flash fast and stable, this would seem to address all of Steve Jobs'es issues with Flash.
I predict fun interesting times ahead!
**except... as I'm writing this, I've just remembered that Opera on iPhone is Opera Mini, and I'm not 100% sure that does include any JS engine?
I doubt it was this, but just in case, if the original image had a limited palette, that might cause problems.
FWIW, I've tried resynth and the "pole" picture looked pretty much the same as CS5 when I tried it, so I'm guessing the author of TFA made a poor selection. I've also previously tried the image from the CS5 promo video with the woman sat on the park bench and I got almost much identical results.
;)
The only area where I'd say Gimp lags is (1). the UI isn't as easy [both for this plugin, and more generally], and (2). the plugin only makes use of a single CPU core.
I don't know if CS5 make use of multiple cores... it bloody should do given the price though!
For the record, I'm getting results from gimp-resynth that are similar to the CS5 results. I just used "Free select tool" [aka lasso] to quickly select *around* the outside of the pole -- being careful not to select anything within the pole -- and then used "Filter->Enhance->Smart remove selection..." and it does a pretty good job. One thing I have noticed with Resynth is that if you undo it and then reapply it (NOT redo), then it'll probably look a bit different from the first attempt, so there's a random element in the algorithm there somewhere! Does anyone know if CS5 does the same?
I installed it pretty easy under Ubuntu (9.10):
$ sudo apt-get install gimp-resynthesizer
However, when I first tried using it, I was using the Filter->Map->Resynthesize... menu option which kind of works, but isn't so great. I had to google to find a good explanation of how to use it. What you should do is:
1. Install as above,
2. Select area of image to remove,
3. Use Filters->Enhance->Smart remove selection...
And to be clear about this - it is fucking awesome. Seriously! I'm not usually _that_ impressed with things (I'm far too old!), but this goes into total witch-craft territory, it is *that* good!
If anyone has managed to install this plugin under Windows, I'd like to know the instructions for doing so (not for me... it's for my *friends*... honest!!!).
And they can't kill him either.
:D
Not saying they would do anything like that... but I'm guessing Steve Jobs would be most angry about such a situation, and it's entirely possible that the thought would cross his mind. Maybe. So Gizmodo could have actually *saved* a young man's life.
You'd think so.... but possibly not. And this might also account for being able to reduce the size of everything *and* probably improve power usage too.
I think even with older iPhones/iPods they've had funny serial numbers on chips that are similar to, but not quite the same as other off-the-shelf components, making it not entirely clear what they are.
With iPhone/iPodTouch OS v1 you had to use the desktop iTunes to install apps. Since v2 (or maybe v3... I can't remember), you can install apps directly onto the iPhone/Touch.
It used to be very squared off... like a tin-can moving up and down in a tube, so no more phallic that a piston in an engine. But the new one is.... I dunno... ends in a point and has various sculpted features... for more pleasure! Or something. It did look very dodgy to me. :O
lol @ Pegg! Anyway, he was the editor... sorry, [ahem] The Editoorrr!
When they were throwing around ideas for who the new Doctor would be, Paterson Joseph seemed the best choice to me, so I was a bit worried when they picked some 16 year old kid. But, having seen the first episode, I have to admit that Matt Smith was really, very very good.
Obviously I'm not privy to Palms motivations here, but as a Linux user I can't help noticing that none of Apples aledged "openness" actually helps me sync my iPod Touch. AFAIK I can only sync it if I jail break it, at which point I have to dick around any time I want to upgrade the firmware. This happens because Apple only want people to sync the iPod/iPhone via their software on their terms.
I guess they're entitled to do so... but it also means that any products that hook into iTunes via the "well documented method" will also suffer from all of it's limitations, *and* will be subject to Apple's whims -- which given Apple's recent behaviour regarding iPhone apps, is... well... a bit shitty.
I guess the only other thing you could do to ensure security (aside from writing your own client extension) is use Chrome rather than Firefox since (AFAIK) Chrome provides better protection between extensions.
Why is this knee-jerk negative reaction every time cloud computing is mentioned on Slashdot?
Probably because the idea of moving computing into a "cloud" isn't that new, and the "cloud" is getting more and more mention in the mainstream press, and at that point PHBs "understand" it *and* it simultaneously becomes a useful word for marketing to use.
Plus, MS bragging about how much they spend "researching" something... blah blah "innovation" blah... is really a press release which is itself used by marketing to make something seem important. I'd venture that a fair chunk of that 9 billion is going to be marketing research rather than anything technical!
AFAIK MS do/did/are/where doing a deal to UK education authorities whereby a fixed fee is paid per computer regardless of what it actually runs. The deal being that if you already use a bunch of MS software, this could work out cheaper for you.... but of course, it also means it will never be worth trying to use anything other than MS because it will always cost more.
You're all ready at +5 so I can't mod you up any more ... but +10,000 for that! :D
Chrome was a bit of a crap name too. Any time I'm searching for something chrome related, I wind up with Firefox pages since they cover the same topics along with the word "chrome". It's bleedin' annoying, that's what it is!!! :D
You do realise it was just spray painting it on the far side hidden from camera view!
Not even the spanish inquisition would've expected that!
It's a very inconsistent language, full of convolution and idiosyncrasies due to it being a hack from the very beginning.
Ahhh I see the problem -- you're confusing JavaScript with PHP!
But Google aren't targeting tablets with Android -- that's more where Chrome OS might exist. Although Google have said that Chrome OS and Android may converge in the future.
Didn't this only happen because it turned out that the "secret" information had already been made public by a US court? So the whole "we don't want to upset the Americans" thing was kind of moot, and made it an easy decision. If that hadn't been the case, I'm not certain which way it would've gone!
And I don't know what 4chan is beyond a reputation that it's supposedly more childish than fark and slashdot combined.
So... on the up-side, with 4chan out of the way, does that mean we win by default?