Google wants browser makers to be more aggressive adding new browser features but the mozilla org was not able to agree with them on the details. So Google went with Chrome to put pressure on the browser makers. Google doesn't need (or want) firefox to die. They just want more innovation at a faster rate and they don't really care which browser is in front. The better the browser, the more time users will spend on-line and the more money Google (and others) will make. As a result of Chrome, I think the mozilla org started paying more attention to new features and are making changes to catch up with Chrome and that is all google really wants.
I think browsers (all of them) are far behind where we (web developers) would like them to be.
I would like more widgets (tree, table, charts, tab pane, split panes, etc) like what I see in adobe flex so I don't have to build this stuff from scratch.
I completely understand that making the current browser features work faster, better and more securely is a high priority. I just think new features to simplify web application development should be a higher priority than it currently seems to be.
I didn't like the way the blue girl's boobs were rendered.
The details were pretty poor.
Her boob had something in front of them, like a necklace, but it
didn't move as it should. It didn't swing forward when she
leaned forward, it didn't blow in the wind when she was flying.
> Except that Star Wars and Jurassic Park will probably be watched centuries from now.
That is really very unlikely given the rate at which we'll advance technologically.
I don't think those movies will impress you even 10 years from now.
It should be possible in 10 years to...
a) render 3d movies in real time in your personal head set
b) render 3d movies where you are a character in the movie.
basically gaming and movies will merge.
If they can work out the licensing issues, they could start with the lecture notes from the MIT OpenCourseWare project.
The MIT OCW lecture notes need detail but they are a good start. There is probably lecture notes from other colleges too.
I'm black and grew up in very poor neighborhood in Brooklyn NYC. When I mentioned this to my white friends they tell me that they fared no better.
It is not just a "socio-economic, poor school, bad parenting" problem. People seem to lack a passion for working in scientific fields. Maybe people don't find IT as interesting we do. Maybe we're the odd ones:-).
Spoon boy: Do not try and bend the spoon. That's impossible. Instead only try to realize the truth. Neo: What truth? Spoon boy: There is no spoon. Neo: There is no spoon? Spoon boy: Then you'll see that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself. ----- You can't get people to do what you want without bending yourself. Don't rant, in the end you got what you wanted the most: you didn't bend.
I've pitched ideas and I've mostly gotten the same response (even from Paul!); the idea is too crazy and/or complex.
I would add to Paul's list, "ignore feedback that discourages you about your idea; build a prototype as quickly as you can no matter what people say about the idea."
If the HTML standard is frozen and 95% of the world ignores it, then it is only needed by the 5% of the world who want it. It is the passion of that 5% of the world that created Firefox. Therefore, it is ridiculous to ask them to give up their passion. Firefox is defined by that passion; it can't exist without it.
I'm sorry for wasting your time. At least I learned something.
There is a suble difference between "enables" and "supports". Calling java from Javascript is enabling techology. It is not enough. XPCOM I think is like activeX. I'm sure you can call java from XAML too, does that make it equal to anything we should care about?
My god, 60% of the web is how many people and websites? The Google index is at 8,058,044,651. There is a domino effect. What will yahoo do if it has to compete with a XAML implemented website hosted by Microsoft. Just remember, a killer app will change an industry. What will Salesforce.com do when Microsoft CRM runs in IE via XAML? They will cave because there is nothing for them to use other than XAML. They are not working on a competive solution today, Microsoft is. As competitors of Microsoft loose market share to sites that adopt XAML, websites will convert like dominos.
There is a power law to the web. Most of the websites are not important. Only a very small number of super site really matter. Ebay has a responsibility to its shareholders to innovate. They don't have a responsibilty to adhere to HTML4.x so that it runs on firefox. I'm not worried about the mom and pop websites. They're probably still writen in HTML 1.0 and if google didn't crawl them, their webservers would be idle.
Ok, if I'm wrong, then too bad we improved firefox for nothing. If you're wrong, we don't need firefox anymore.
What is the problem here? Are you saying things are as good as it will ever get so let's sit back and relax. Are you saying that Microsoft is just a big failure, that 40+ billion dollars in their bank account doesn't mean they know what they're doing? We open source guys, we built linux and it has 5% of the market and we build firefox and it has 5% of the market, just wait the lack of standards of Microsoft will eventually bring it down.
Is there a problem asking you to think about how we can make firefox much better? If you picked a solution and it is working (firefox is gaining marketshare), are you saying let's not think about how we can get firefox to be more useful? If so, then that is fine by me. Don't think any more about this topic; anyone who is interested in thinking, please follow me.
Maybe you're saying, don't worry about HTML, XUL is the answer. Don't worry that no one uses XUL, it might become a standard. I hear you. I hope you're right. I'm only asking if there is more that we should think about. Don't tell me XUL is enough. XUL in the control of IBM is enough. XUL widely deployed by the top 100 websites would be enough. A html file with the instructions for programing in XUL is not enough, yet. Show me the killer app (firefox, mozilla, etc don't count). Send me email when the job openings for XUL developers are larger than job openings for.NET on hotjobs, dice, etc.
Does it matter why the Microsoft beast kills you? Microsoft is a monopoly. Are you saying just because they don't follow standards, we should? I'm sorry, who has got 40+ Billion dollars in cash? The ends justify the means. History is written by the winners. Go back and read about how the winners won. There are no standards accept the rich keep getting richer. If you want to stand infront of the tank with your copy of firefox, be my guest. I'm going to shoot them for the safety of trees while they're taking a nap.
A STANDARD is what a majority of the people agree to use. It is not a law of physics. If there is a standard that says that "woman are not allowed to vote" at what point would you suggest we change the standard? What if you've spent the last several years of your life adding "male only voting options to firefox" should I listen to your concern about standards if I'm a woman?
At some point STANDARDS that don't evolve are discarded or displaced. There are probably standards on how to transmit analog phone calls, should we not work on the digital standard becaus e analog standard is still in use?
HMTL evolved to what it is today. We have learned a lot since it was created. If we started over again, it might be completely different. Why live with a broken standard that limits your expressiveness. How many dhtml packages to implement menus, tab pages, scrollable tables, tree controls should we build before we decide we need more form controls in HTML? Did someone ask you what form controls you want in HTML? Did you get to vote on it? Yes, you can live with it but why live with something you can change, especially when chaning it makes your life better (ok, maybe it only makes my life better, you already have a working menu package, mine is still broken; it only works on IE; mozilla doesn't understand the IE hacks; 95% of my customers use IE).
A STANDARD solves a certain problem. You can keep backwards compatability; you can innovate without violating a STANDARD. It is ok to think outside the STANDARD. It is just ideas we're talking about.
I've written about 200K lines of code that generates html and javascript web applications.
Please don't complain if I think html and javascript can be improved. If I can get 90% of my revenue from IE, I'm not going to do a single thing to get the remaining 10% just to support firefox. If my site is compelling, my customers will use IE. If my site is not compelling, adding firefox support isn't going to help me.
I don't want to displace you or your work. I'm not trying to outsource your job! I'm not trying to destablize firefox. I'm not trying to desupport HTML. Why does innovation scare you? If I follow your logic why did you switch to HTML from the previous application technology that was the standard at the time? I'll tell you why, you didn't have a choice!
Now you have a choice to control your destiny. I'll tell you what your issue is, you just don't want to change; you're happy the way things are now. It is natural. But what will happen when you don't have a choice. Microsoft is brewing something that will take your choice away. Don't insult me because I'm trying to warn you. You can ignore my warning; just remember I'm not the one with 40+ billion dollars that is trying to assimullate you.
I'll tell you what, go back to bed, I'll wake you when it is over. You don't have to worry about it now. I'm sure it will be much easier after you've taken your required C# training classes.
XAML just instanciates.NET objects. People are writing.NET apps and SDKs today. Having a standards body bless XUL is not enough. Furthermore, XAML won't have to wait for longhorn, Microsoft has ported it to XP (it is in limited pre-alpha release now, I've seen it). When XAML on XP is ready, they'll install it with the next security patch (I'm sure they'll have plenty of patches to select from). Don't bet that Microsoft needs longhorn to bring XAML apps to the market. http://www.xamlon.com/ lets you build XAML apps today.
W3C only defines HTML because we let them. We should not wait, we can create the next version even if they don't bless it. At some point they'll have no choice. If you're hung up on the name, then lets call it WebAppML instead. Focusing on the label, kinda misses the point.
You may be missing my point on other levels too. The web evolved into what it is today. It wasn't designed to be what it is today. It evolves by our actions as developers of websites and web browers. Is there something wrong with driving it to make us richer? I think the browser is a low hanging fruit to get innovation in the hands of millions people in a way that would help our economy. Please separate the goals to make things better from how the world is labeled today. We can change the label if that is all that is holding you back. (There is no spoon.)
What is the API and SDK under XUL that is the counterpart to.NET? I didn't think XUL gave you access to the Java class libraries. I agree XUL is good but I'm not sure it is enough. XAML has an SVG like markup, does XUL have this?
XUL also needs a lot more people pushing it forward. Maybe a XUL plugin for IE is would help. Maybe when XAML ships, there will be more interest in XUL. By then it may be too late.
I think browsers are great but they should be much better. Microsoft is not releasing new features for IE because the features of XAML are a lot more powerful than dhtml/javascript. They are spending time integrating XAML into their OS and products. I agree that html will never go away but I think it is a lot easier to build the killer XAML app (and yes, the killer virus too) than the equivalent dhtml app. As mentioned, MS's products are a virus platform but I suspect they'll take the "OS enforced per process" sandbox approach that the NSA added to Linux. Furthermore, XAML features will drive its adoption on the websites that currently love Microsoft technology. Companies like Yahoo, Google, Oracle, SAP, etc are going to need technology to compete or their products/websites will loose market share. I don't trust these companies to build this right and for everyone to use; oracle is not going to build it so that SAP can use it. Because the most powerful competitors of Microsoft are divided, the open source community has to do it. We can't let MS take a technology lead in this space. I think Firefox has gained market share because it is in the eye of the perfect storm. The seas are calm now but a great evil is brewing in the land of Redmond.
We need to finish SVG support. We need to add an xml language to invoke java inside browsers to balance the XAML features IE will provide. We need more innovation in the xml language the browser renders. It needs to render more complex things. The form elements need to be updated to match (or surpass) Macromedia Flex's UI library (menus, toolbars, tab pages, datagrid, tree control, editable combo box, etc). I think there should be an option to enable the swing widgets set to replace the browser built-in one. This way you can upgrade the widgets separately. Browsers should support a fast animation engine similar to Flash. I think we should add a game engine to the browser that allows everyone to build sims or doom like sites much more easily.
Standards are great. I'm not saying get rid of the html 4.0 standard. I'm saying we need to create a 5.0, 6.0, etc that are much better. Standing still will cost you a lot.
If you want more high tech jobs, then create more powerful html standards. Companies will have to hire more developers to update and rewrite their applications. If they don't and their competitors do then the lagging companies will fail; I don't think companies have a choice. All you need to do is give them a compelling reason. The first web browser led to a huge employment boost. The evolution of HTML was a key factor. If you want more money then add power to the browser. We need to make the create a new html standard the makes the current standard look out of date and boring. This is what Microsoft did with MFC over the years. It drives a lot of upgrade revenue for everyone. This could work for you!
We should not use w3c for this; they are much too slow. Debate the features and schema on Slashdot. Build it in FireFox and w3c can standardize it years from now.
Obviously, the big problem is that people are not having safe sex (because they don't want to or are not able to).
I worry that with news like this more people will practice unsafe sex. Eventually the AIDS virus will mutate and the problem will just resurface later.
I'm in the same boat as the poster.
My latest approach is to just build a prototype and then find a company that would benefit from the product. The next step is to get a job at that company and befriend the people who have influence up the management chain. You can fill in the rest...
The hard part is not the coding or patents. The two things I find hard are:
a) Building the relationship with people who have influence. Influential people are not easy to meet and in many cases are not open to new ideas. It is ironic because many influential people became so because they introduced a company to a new idea. What is key is that the introduction is more important than the idea.
b) Controlling my passion for the technology/product so that I can properly communicate the vision. I have to focus on the business model for the product and not the product. Creating a compelling business model is hard because if it weren't then someone else would have already done it. It is ironic that the best business models are obvious but they are also unknown.
I'm frightened by patents too but there little I can do to fix that problem. The two problems above are more immediate.
Paul once revealed his desire to create a website with misleading facts to see who could fooled. Should a wealthy person who states unsubstantiated facts be/.-ed?
If you can't determine if an arbirary program halts on arbirary input then you can't tell if that program has a bug.
If want a language without bugs, you have to use a language that does not interesting problems.
a) As it is now
b) if it came with (select one or more)
b1) a screen
b2) a hard disk
b3) senors and moter controllers
c) not at all
How much would you pay?
If AI becomes good enough to equal human intelligence then it's 1st task should be
to create jobs. Clearly if AI causes large numbers of people to become unemployeed then the world will not be better off. A machine vs human war is completely avoidable.
I think that if this kind of AI is possible then machines will become much smarter than humans very quickly so the job creation task should take a short period of time; after which machines will be free do whatever they please.
During lift off, insulation from the outer fuel tank hit the left wing. During reentry, the left wing broke apart first. Why didn't they send someone to have a look at the wing while the ship was in space?
Slashdot Mirror
Google wants browser makers to be more aggressive adding new browser features but the mozilla org was not able to agree with them on the details. So Google went with Chrome to put pressure on the browser makers. Google doesn't need (or want) firefox to die. They just want more innovation at a faster rate and they don't really care which browser is in front. The better the browser, the more time users will spend on-line and the more money Google (and others) will make. As a result of Chrome, I think the mozilla org started paying more attention to new features and are making changes to catch up with Chrome and that is all google really wants. I think browsers (all of them) are far behind where we (web developers) would like them to be. I would like more widgets (tree, table, charts, tab pane, split panes, etc) like what I see in adobe flex so I don't have to build this stuff from scratch. I completely understand that making the current browser features work faster, better and more securely is a high priority. I just think new features to simplify web application development should be a higher priority than it currently seems to be.
I didn't like the way the blue girl's boobs were rendered. The details were pretty poor.
Her boob had something in front of them, like a necklace, but it didn't move as it should. It didn't swing forward when she leaned forward, it didn't blow in the wind when she was flying.
> Except that Star Wars and Jurassic Park will probably be watched centuries from now. ...
a) render 3d movies in real time in your personal head set
b) render 3d movies where you are a character in the movie.
basically gaming and movies will merge.
That is really very unlikely given the rate at which we'll advance technologically. I don't think those movies will impress you even 10 years from now. It should be possible in 10 years to
If they can work out the licensing issues, they could start with the lecture notes from the MIT OpenCourseWare project. The MIT OCW lecture notes need detail but they are a good start. There is probably lecture notes from other colleges too.
I'm black and grew up in very poor neighborhood in Brooklyn NYC.
:-).
When I mentioned this to my white friends they tell me that they fared no better.
It is not just a "socio-economic, poor school, bad parenting" problem.
People seem to lack a passion for working in scientific fields.
Maybe people don't find IT as interesting we do.
Maybe we're the odd ones
If a millary puts risky AIs on the battle field and they win the battle then what?
The results could be open to the public.
Could solar panels on every home/business save us?
Spoon boy: Do not try and bend the spoon. That's impossible. Instead only try to realize the truth.
Neo: What truth?
Spoon boy: There is no spoon.
Neo: There is no spoon?
Spoon boy: Then you'll see that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself.
-----
You can't get people to do what you want without bending yourself. Don't rant, in the end you got what you wanted the most: you didn't bend.
I would add to Paul's list, "ignore feedback that discourages you about your idea; build a prototype as quickly as you can no matter what people say about the idea."
I'm sorry for wasting your time. At least I learned something.
My god, 60% of the web is how many people and websites? The Google index is at 8,058,044,651. There is a domino effect. What will yahoo do if it has to compete with a XAML implemented website hosted by Microsoft. Just remember, a killer app will change an industry. What will Salesforce.com do when Microsoft CRM runs in IE via XAML? They will cave because there is nothing for them to use other than XAML. They are not working on a competive solution today, Microsoft is. As competitors of Microsoft loose market share to sites that adopt XAML, websites will convert like dominos.
There is a power law to the web. Most of the websites are not important. Only a very small number of super site really matter. Ebay has a responsibility to its shareholders to innovate. They don't have a responsibilty to adhere to HTML4.x so that it runs on firefox. I'm not worried about the mom and pop websites. They're probably still writen in HTML 1.0 and if google didn't crawl them, their webservers would be idle.
Ok, if I'm wrong, then too bad we improved firefox for nothing. If you're wrong, we don't need firefox anymore.
What is the problem here? Are you saying things are as good as it will ever get so let's sit back and relax. Are you saying that Microsoft is just a big failure, that 40+ billion dollars in their bank account doesn't mean they know what they're doing? We open source guys, we built linux and it has 5% of the market and we build firefox and it has 5% of the market, just wait the lack of standards of Microsoft will eventually bring it down.
Is there a problem asking you to think about how we can make firefox much better? If you picked a solution and it is working (firefox is gaining marketshare), are you saying let's not think about how we can get firefox to be more useful? If so, then that is fine by me. Don't think any more about this topic; anyone who is interested in thinking, please follow me.
Maybe you're saying, don't worry about HTML, XUL is the answer. Don't worry that no one uses XUL, it might become a standard. I hear you. I hope you're right. I'm only asking if there is more that we should think about. Don't tell me XUL is enough. XUL in the control of IBM is enough. XUL widely deployed by the top 100 websites would be enough. A html file with the instructions for programing in XUL is not enough, yet. Show me the killer app (firefox, mozilla, etc don't count). Send me email when the job openings for XUL developers are larger than job openings for .NET on hotjobs, dice, etc.
A STANDARD is what a majority of the people agree to use. It is not a law of physics. If there is a standard that says that "woman are not allowed to vote" at what point would you suggest we change the standard? What if you've spent the last several years of your life adding "male only voting options to firefox" should I listen to your concern about standards if I'm a woman?
At some point STANDARDS that don't evolve are discarded or displaced. There are probably standards on how to transmit analog phone calls, should we not work on the digital standard becaus e analog standard is still in use?
HMTL evolved to what it is today. We have learned a lot since it was created. If we started over again, it might be completely different. Why live with a broken standard that limits your expressiveness. How many dhtml packages to implement menus, tab pages, scrollable tables, tree controls should we build before we decide we need more form controls in HTML? Did someone ask you what form controls you want in HTML? Did you get to vote on it? Yes, you can live with it but why live with something you can change, especially when chaning it makes your life better (ok, maybe it only makes my life better, you already have a working menu package, mine is still broken; it only works on IE; mozilla doesn't understand the IE hacks; 95% of my customers use IE).
A STANDARD solves a certain problem. You can keep backwards compatability; you can innovate without violating a STANDARD. It is ok to think outside the STANDARD. It is just ideas we're talking about.
I've written about 200K lines of code that generates html and javascript web applications. Please don't complain if I think html and javascript can be improved. If I can get 90% of my revenue from IE, I'm not going to do a single thing to get the remaining 10% just to support firefox. If my site is compelling, my customers will use IE. If my site is not compelling, adding firefox support isn't going to help me.
I don't want to displace you or your work. I'm not trying to outsource your job! I'm not trying to destablize firefox. I'm not trying to desupport HTML. Why does innovation scare you? If I follow your logic why did you switch to HTML from the previous application technology that was the standard at the time? I'll tell you why, you didn't have a choice!
Now you have a choice to control your destiny. I'll tell you what your issue is, you just don't want to change; you're happy the way things are now. It is natural. But what will happen when you don't have a choice. Microsoft is brewing something that will take your choice away. Don't insult me because I'm trying to warn you. You can ignore my warning; just remember I'm not the one with 40+ billion dollars that is trying to assimullate you.
I'll tell you what, go back to bed, I'll wake you when it is over. You don't have to worry about it now. I'm sure it will be much easier after you've taken your required C# training classes.
W3C only defines HTML because we let them. We should not wait, we can create the next version even if they don't bless it. At some point they'll have no choice. If you're hung up on the name, then lets call it WebAppML instead. Focusing on the label, kinda misses the point.
You may be missing my point on other levels too. The web evolved into what it is today. It wasn't designed to be what it is today. It evolves by our actions as developers of websites and web browers. Is there something wrong with driving it to make us richer? I think the browser is a low hanging fruit to get innovation in the hands of millions people in a way that would help our economy. Please separate the goals to make things better from how the world is labeled today. We can change the label if that is all that is holding you back. (There is no spoon.)
XUL also needs a lot more people pushing it forward. Maybe a XUL plugin for IE is would help. Maybe when XAML ships, there will be more interest in XUL. By then it may be too late.
We need to finish SVG support. We need to add an xml language to invoke java inside browsers to balance the XAML features IE will provide. We need more innovation in the xml language the browser renders. It needs to render more complex things. The form elements need to be updated to match (or surpass) Macromedia Flex's UI library (menus, toolbars, tab pages, datagrid, tree control, editable combo box, etc). I think there should be an option to enable the swing widgets set to replace the browser built-in one. This way you can upgrade the widgets separately. Browsers should support a fast animation engine similar to Flash. I think we should add a game engine to the browser that allows everyone to build sims or doom like sites much more easily.
Standards are great. I'm not saying get rid of the html 4.0 standard. I'm saying we need to create a 5.0, 6.0, etc that are much better. Standing still will cost you a lot.
If you want more high tech jobs, then create more powerful html standards. Companies will have to hire more developers to update and rewrite their applications. If they don't and their competitors do then the lagging companies will fail; I don't think companies have a choice. All you need to do is give them a compelling reason. The first web browser led to a huge employment boost. The evolution of HTML was a key factor. If you want more money then add power to the browser. We need to make the create a new html standard the makes the current standard look out of date and boring. This is what Microsoft did with MFC over the years. It drives a lot of upgrade revenue for everyone. This could work for you!
We should not use w3c for this; they are much too slow. Debate the features and schema on Slashdot. Build it in FireFox and w3c can standardize it years from now.
Obviously, the big problem is that people are not having safe sex (because they don't want to or are not able to). I worry that with news like this more people will practice unsafe sex. Eventually the AIDS virus will mutate and the problem will just resurface later.
I'm in the same boat as the poster.
My latest approach is to just build a prototype and then find a company that would benefit from the product. The next step is to get a job at that company and befriend the people who have influence up the management chain. You can fill in the rest...
The hard part is not the coding or patents. The two things I find hard are:
a) Building the relationship with people who have influence. Influential people are not easy to meet and in many cases are not open to new ideas. It is ironic because many influential people became so because they introduced a company to a new idea. What is key is that the introduction is more important than the idea.
b) Controlling my passion for the technology/product so that I can properly communicate the vision. I have to focus on the business model for the product and not the product. Creating a compelling business model is hard because if it weren't then someone else would have already done it. It is ironic that the best business models are obvious but they are also unknown.
I'm frightened by patents too but there little I can do to fix that problem. The two problems above are more immediate.
Paul once revealed his desire to create a website with misleading facts to see who could fooled. /.-ed?
Should a wealthy person who states unsubstantiated facts be
No wonder Microsoft gave Apple $500 Million in the past.
Without Apple, Microsoft would probably not make serious advances in usability.
I feel safer now...
If you can't determine if an arbirary program halts on arbirary input then you can't tell if that program has a bug.
If want a language without bugs, you have to use a language that does not interesting problems.
a) As it is now b) if it came with (select one or more) b1) a screen b2) a hard disk b3) senors and moter controllers c) not at all How much would you pay?
If AI becomes good enough to equal human intelligence then it's 1st task should be to create jobs. Clearly if AI causes large numbers of people to become unemployeed then the world will not be better off. A machine vs human war is completely avoidable. I think that if this kind of AI is possible then machines will become much smarter than humans very quickly so the job creation task should take a short period of time; after which machines will be free do whatever they please.
During lift off, insulation from the outer fuel tank hit the left wing. During reentry, the left wing broke apart first. Why didn't they send someone to have a look at the wing while the ship was in space?