The actual cost per episode of Futurama (and The Simpsons) was/is around $1 million for around 22 minutes of animation...
Which is a crime really, given how unutterably cringeworthy The Simpsons has become. A million dollars for the wacky, wacky adventures of no longer just dumb, but crazy too, Homer Simpson + celebrity guest.
Time for the "When did they Jump the Shark?" debate?
What the fuck are you talking about? TCP/IP is the carrier protocol for internet traffic. Bittorrent bits, http bits, ftp bits and so on are ALL TCP/IP bits.
"One of the most fascinating and popular protocols and P2P file-distribution systems on the Internet is BitTorrent, first released in 2001. Continuous improvements led to its emergence as a force in 2003; by early 2005 it was perhaps the dominant protocol on the Net, second only to TCP/IP itself."
Yeah, cos nobody uses http, ftp or pop3 any more... He sure has a penchant for overstatement tinged with immense lack-of-clue.
I couldn't imagine Linux without Slackware. The most elegant, stable and yet simple linux i ever used. Makes me proud to say "I'm a Slacker!".
Looking forward to it myself - Currently running slack on my whipping-boy P90 box which is the test bed for any ideas I need to check out. It's a bit rattly - sometimes there's a bit of turbulence that'll have you hanging on for dear life, but slack has impressed me so much so it's replacing Ubuntu on this desktop - my main box.
I can't wait to play with that installer again - the fact that it allows you to do only what you want (and not in any particular order) was a refreshing change from the 2 dialogue wizard approach (this is your hard disk. This is your monitor. INSTALL) - not that simplistic installs are a bad thing, they just don't do it for me.
Thanks to Pat and the team for this latest release - your efforts are appreciated!
Re:Ironically, that story isn't true
on
New Standard Keyboard
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The work of Liebowitz and Margolis, cited above, makes this abundantly clear. The two economists thoroughly researched the entire Dvorak saga, and discovered that all of the things people like Trogre have heard about the Dvorak keyboard simply are not true.
I would argue that both sides of the argument (Dvarok vs Liebowitz and Margolis) had something to gain by proving their point - Liebowitz and Margolis needed to debunk the idea that economic factors lead to random take-up of technologies regardless of quality/suitability just as much as Dvorak wanted to propagandise his new keyboard layout. It's in the interest of Liebowitz and Margolis to make economics sound good because they are... *drumroll*...economists! You don't get priests and preachers standing up in the pulpit on Sunday encouraging open and frank discussions on the inconsistencies in biblical texts just as you don't hear your average economist debunking economic theory - they want to hang on to their jobs.
That said, can you guess which layout I use? I hate to admit I'm wrong:-)
In my own experience I must say I prefer Dvorak's layout - it's not perfect, but it's better. The simple idea of having the most commonly used consonants and the vowels on the home keys... why didn't that smack anybody in the face before? I didn't place my hands an the home keys when I used QWERTY - it didn't make sense to me to do so. Now I do as that's where it makes most sense for my hands to rest.
It's not all good - typos are weird (I get a lot of mexid vewols). Configuration can be a pain (some Linux distros do NOT work well with alternative layouts). Other people's computers make you look brand new, hunting and pecking, but on the upside nobody wants to use your computer:-).
I'll agree that it's not for everybody, but for those of you willing to put up with the slight annoyances the benefits are plain to see.
In 1983? More likely to be some of that lovely blue on blue text favoured by many IBM and DOS applications of the day. It was used a lot in text editors IIRC.
Actually, that looks like a Mac in the background - those pics may not be from 1983 at all but from... 1984! Yet another hideous slashdot innacuracy;-)
I dunno about your company, but where I work, and a number of other places I know of (friends work there, ex-employment, etc...) there's a lot of stuff on the web-- time cards, change management systems, computer-based training, employee locaterators... and it all requires MSIE. It's either ActiveX, or uses proprietary MSIE broken HTML, or what-have-you, because the webmonkeys that created it know everyone has a Windows box on their desk so they could do it the easy way instead of the right way.
This is actually the case with every single part of the intranet site at my office apart from the most basic ones. To clock in I have to use a form in IE consisting of 2 text boxes (User, pass) and 2 buttons (Submit, clear). I'm sure most of you can see the code required - a basic <form>. Just had a look at the source for the page... It's over 2K of CSS and JavaScript that'll only work on IE.
They have actually standardised on IE/MS Everything in this place (clue) but fscked if I'm going to use it. A combination of Firefox extensions and a NTLM Authorization Proxy Server means I can use a real browser and SSH home to my real operating system...
Disclaimer: I'm not one of these dillusional people who claim Linux can run Windows games faster than Windows itself under Wine.
Thanks be to $DEITY_OF_CHOICE that I'm not the only one who's noticed! While Wine(X)/Cedega have a decent enough list of titles when it comes to compatibility, the performance on some titles is atrocious...
On my PIII/700 I can play games like Half Life without major issues as the box far outstrips the minimum requirements for this game but a borderline case like say, GTAIII, where I just about match the recommended spec has very mixed results. Taking the example of GTAIII the compatibility is excellent. The interface, audio and so on react exactly as under Windows but I can only get an unbearable framerate - a graphics card upgrade had little effect... the performance is dropping somewhere else - at API level I guess.
I switched entirely to Linux over a year ago and I plan to sort out a new box (A64) to play DooM 3 - I suppose I'll also pick up UT2K3/4... Maybe I'll get GTAIII back as well:)
As for legacy drivers. Why should Dell be obligated to provide Driver support for Operating Systems they don't sell and haven't sold for years? Dell never sold printers at the same time it sold Windows 98. Most people do not "just" buy a Dell Printer, they buy it with a system purchase. Lastly, the support information for the printer and basic information available on the website clearly states which Operating Systems the printer can use. Note further down the page on the right under Compatibility.. where is says, Compatible only with Windows 2000 and Windows XP.
I never said this guy was the brightest spark - even if he read the minimum specs he probably wouldn't know if his machine met them. I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume you work for Dell... I just get the feeling, is all. Following from that assumption I would guess you have dealt with Dell customers. Had any who have known what's going on and what to do right off the bat? No? That's probably why the support guys have that script - easier to assume they've tried nothing.
The reason I was stunned by the situation is that Lexmark offer a Win9x driver for what is essentially exactly the same hardware. It wouldn't cost Dell a lot to include a "legacy" driver on their CD and they might sell a few more printers. They already have driver code to work with! Small changes required! Hell, I might have tried it myself if I had known enough about WinDriver hacking...
The fact that printers are offered individually means people are buying them. I guess at least 10% of people are still using Win9x. That's 10% of a potential customer base cut right out. I know Dell aren't obliged to supply a legacy driver, but not doing so seems to me to be a bit silly given the effort required.
This is a fact - you'll also find that Dell don't provide the same level of driver support on these rebadged pieces of crap.
I recently had an experience where a friend of my Dad bought a Dell printer for his ageing Win98 box. The supplied driver disc was for Win2K/XP only. A little research yielded the fact that the Dell model (A920) was the exact same as the Lexmark X1150. I remember the model numbers due to the trauma involved... Lexmark provide a Win9x driver for this model. Dell don't. Attempts to install the Lexmark driver were hampered by the fact that the printer identified itself as Dell.
Even worse was the fact that upon calling Dell it was suggested he buy a new machine - from Dell of course. I started wondering if there was some specific reason for the lack of support - Surely Win9x support means you would sell more printers! Ah, you want to sell more of those boxes instead...
A friend of my sister works for Dell front line support. I asked him about the situation and he said "yeah, we had a few calls about that..." and nothing else.
Me: Why no 98 driver? The Lexmark version has one - surely a trivial matter for one of your guys to customise it for the Dell version. Him: But it's a Dell printer - a Lexmark driver won't work. Me (slapping forehead): Why is there no 98 driver? Him: Yeah, we had a few calls on that. Me: I can see how you got that Dell job. Him: Thanks!
He bought a new box (not from Dell, thankfully) and the old machine was donated to a local school. I guess all's Dell that ends Dell...
That's not a function of CLI vs. GUI at all. A programmer could, if he wished, show exactly the same information as the CLI on the GUI, but not vice-versa. Way to dis a better tool!
You're absolutely right that the amount of feedback isn't a function of the environment, but it is a symptom - and yes, it is the programmer's choice but only to an extent. Each environment only allows for certain types of feedback. I gave the impression in my original post that I don't use a GUI - this is not true. I use KDE quite a lot at home for The GIMP, mozilla and so on. I also have several xterms open with various command line tools like gramofile, transcode, mplex, make and so on running.
When it comes to the information which is fed back from the apps I'm using the command line apps are generally more "polite" and informative - they wait until I'm finished doing what I am doing then I get a progress report from my background process if required. The GUI pops up dialog which demands immediate attention before I can go any further. This is a function of the environment. If you are attempting to do the impossible in an event driven system then you're going to find out about it immediately - fair enough. Thing is, if an app crashes you're going to find out about it immediately. If an app finishes normally it tells you about it. If an app finishes abnormally it tells you about it - it rarely tells you the important stuff, though - even if you do click "More Info..."
...Oh sorry, you must be a linux fanboy, which means that if you can't type
fchsfejfs -p xy -o trw at some stupid CLI, your shit will remain stuck in your anus...
Mnyesss, I see... I suggest you read Neal Stephenson's excellent essay In the Beginning Was The Command Line and don't express another opinion on the CLI until you do - but this is merely a suggestion.
Your GUI is a subtle lie about what your system is truly up to. Even the author of TFA expresses a distrust about what the dialogs presented him are hiding:
"My biggest annoyance with the current version is that it keeps reinstalling features, which requires me to reinsert the master disc over and over. I'm not sure if this is a trick to check with Microsoft's database to make sure I'm a registered user or if the program is just stupid."
If I am presented with a choice of spending a few minutes learning a command syntax and being in control of my system or an eternity being presented with deceptive (yes, deceptive - what's the last Windows dialog you saw which told you exactly what was happening?), frustrating dialogs I think you'll find me at the bash shell.
...
getting mplayer working was a bit of a challenge (not included for some godawful reason)
I have been led to believe that this wasn't included due to a statement by the mplayer team that binary packages infringe the GPL.
Not sure how true this is given the respect for software licensing they show by distributing binary wincodecs on their site without the appropriate license agreement.
She was complaining about our eyes glazing over, not our eyes glaring down at her chest.
This is simply called "not paying attention to what the other person is saying". Both sexes are guilty of this. Fixing it is more of a matter of acquiring conversational skills than suppressing your hormones (unless some beauty queen is competing for your attention).
Ever heard of someone who's a "good listener"? They just know how to pay attention.
Fair point. I guess I fail the good listener test!:)
I could make the excuse that I was using the point in the original post to make a more general point about the topic at hand... *cough*
When it comes to glazing over and not listening, for me it generally comes down to the topic rather than the gender of the speaker. I find it hard to listen to anyone speak about sport, TV, fashion and a hundred other topics. If it's a tech topic or related to my job I can generally stay tuned in.
That said, there are some people who just have a talent for making me drift off. If they have absolutely no passion for, or interest in what they are saying they'll probably get a corresponding response...
I try not to let it intrude on my platonic and professional relationships and think I am quite successful at this - but I'm never sure:)
and
Life... Life is like animal porn. It's not for everybody - Doug Stanhope
Supporting animal porn is one of the most disrespectful things you to a woman. You can't pretend to do both. Loser.
Hmmm... I don't see the problem. Was I advocating porn in any form?
The actual reasoning behind this quote has little to do with physical abuse. It is about the nature of human existence and the tendency of humans to reduce horrific situations to a platitude of few words. Depression is handled with "cheer up, it might never happen" and poor socio-economic conditions with "it could be worse". Stanhope was dealing with suicide being "the coward's way out" - pointing out that life is sometimes very hard to deal with and the dismissal of somebody's decision to end their life by calling them a coward is very short sighted. The truth is this person had real problems and had nowhere to turn due to the nature of this society - no other option but to end their life. Their despair had become greater than their survival instinct and the relationships around them. When existence is this dark it is very real and very frightening - to even utter the word "coward" is to admit a complete lack of understanding and compassion, or perhaps it's an ill-conceived attempt to shift blame.
Please tell me how any of this conflicts with my original post? If anything this statement recognises animal porn as one of the more grim cultural outputs of humankind, but since the parent post is AC and ends with an insult I get the feeling IHBT.
So many times I talk or I see another woman talk to you guys and your eyes just gloss over like you go into some standby mode until we finish.
I think it's due to the fact that most, if not all us men are driven by that overriding biological imperative, sex. Personally I try not to let it intrude on my platonic and professional relationships and think I am quite successful at this - but I'm never sure:)
You could help out by pointing it out whenever it happens - ("I'm up here!") but most guys don't even realise their doing it - it's instinct. I have a belief that we are endowed with intelligence to make instinct redundant - intelligence gets you further in life. When's the last time you saw a successful professional (outside management) working solely on the archipallium? Thing is, a lot of the time people have a tendency to abandon their higher functions for a bit of hootin' and hollerin'
Just know that the next time a guy glazes over, becomes a gibbering wreck, acts like a pompous ass or keeps gawking at certain physical attributes it's nothing personal - it's a rush of hormones to the head...
In any case many of had followed history and not only changed our GIFs, but also our JPEGs to PNG
This cannot work for the simple reason that JPEG is designed specifically for lossy compression of photographs and other complex images. Think of it as mp3 type compression - discarding data with quality decreasing proportional to size. A great tool for the dialup age.
PNG compression is entirely unsuited to this purpose - the level of compression for these types of images is terrible. Simple diagrammatical type images compress very well in PNG. Think of it as a zip type compression. Repeated elements of the image, such as whitespace which JPEG doesn't handle very well, are well suited to PNG. Ever zipped a log file? Plenty of repeated elements, great compression.
Converting GIF to PNG? Fine, you'll likely end up with smaller files as a bonus.
However, if the comparison were gratitous, then Godwin's Law would need to be enforced.
*sigh*
Godwin's Law is not meant to be invoked. It's merely an observation: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
I believe it should be seen like Moore's law - merely the result of the observation of a trend, but not set in stone and impossible to enforce in any meaningful manner.
You can spout the mantra that it just supports IE's non-standard ways, but in the real world you don't stay in business as a web developer unless it looks good in IE.
I agree - it's unfortunate situation but it is the reality, yes. Thing is, I'm not in the "real world" - if I was I would surely make the effort to support the widest user base I possibly could.
Couple of points, though - the general rule for corporate sites with poor support is to *only* support IE on Windows. Highly annoying, I think you'll agree. Also, I don't think it's worth the effort of making sure everything is perfect on a personal homepage (unless you want to, of course). I made some effort in getting my site to render in everything from links to firefox, but it looks quite different in each browser. I'm not going to kill myself over that.
I think the only major issue with it on IE is that I use PNGs with transparency - these render with a white background. Oh, and you should still try to get people to switch to a real browser - not customers, but do spend time working with friends and family on this. They'll thank you for it.
"The truth is that consumers aren't going to worry about things like CSS and PNG support," said Robert Iliad, a developer who is participating in the feedback process. "There are still millions of consumers using IE 5.5, so how are you going to get them to use IE 7.0 just because of some obscure thing called CSS?"
They seem to be under the impression that PNG alpha and CSS support are solely in the interests of web developers.
I am no professional when it comes to web design - I'm not going to tailor a site for IE, so if they start to support accepted standards it's purely a bonus for the visitor (or "customer")
Also, if I was a Microsoft customer I would be inclined to find the statement from the article insulting. Back when I was a MS customer I did want things like CSS and PNG support - that's why I used Mozilla. That they assume a zero level of knowledge just because I use their products is probably why I stopped using their products.
Bottom line: Standards support? Don't bet on it - Microsoft didn't get where they are today by supporting open standards, they prefer to invent them.
Slashdot Mirror
Which is a crime really, given how unutterably cringeworthy The Simpsons has become. A million dollars for the wacky, wacky adventures of no longer just dumb, but crazy too, Homer Simpson + celebrity guest.
Time for the "When did they Jump the Shark?" debate?
What the fuck are you talking about? TCP/IP is the carrier protocol for internet traffic. Bittorrent bits, http bits, ftp bits and so on are ALL TCP/IP bits.
"One of the most fascinating and popular protocols and P2P file-distribution systems on the Internet is BitTorrent, first released in 2001. Continuous improvements led to its emergence as a force in 2003; by early 2005 it was perhaps the dominant protocol on the Net, second only to TCP/IP itself."
Yeah, cos nobody uses http, ftp or pop3 any more... He sure has a penchant for overstatement tinged with immense lack-of-clue.
I couldn't imagine Linux without Slackware. The most elegant, stable and yet simple linux i ever used. Makes me proud to say "I'm a Slacker!".
Looking forward to it myself - Currently running slack on my whipping-boy P90 box which is the test bed for any ideas I need to check out. It's a bit rattly - sometimes there's a bit of turbulence that'll have you hanging on for dear life, but slack has impressed me so much so it's replacing Ubuntu on this desktop - my main box.
I can't wait to play with that installer again - the fact that it allows you to do only what you want (and not in any particular order) was a refreshing change from the 2 dialogue wizard approach (this is your hard disk. This is your monitor. INSTALL) - not that simplistic installs are a bad thing, they just don't do it for me.
Thanks to Pat and the team for this latest release - your efforts are appreciated!
That said, can you guess which layout I use? I hate to admit I'm wrong
In my own experience I must say I prefer Dvorak's layout - it's not perfect, but it's better. The simple idea of having the most commonly used consonants and the vowels on the home keys... why didn't that smack anybody in the face before? I didn't place my hands an the home keys when I used QWERTY - it didn't make sense to me to do so. Now I do as that's where it makes most sense for my hands to rest.
It's not all good - typos are weird (I get a lot of mexid vewols). Configuration can be a pain (some Linux distros do NOT work well with alternative layouts). Other people's computers make you look brand new, hunting and pecking, but on the upside nobody wants to use your computer
I'll agree that it's not for everybody, but for those of you willing to put up with the slight annoyances the benefits are plain to see.
Actually, that looks like a Mac in the background - those pics may not be from 1983 at all but from... 1984! Yet another hideous slashdot innacuracy
See lirc.org.
They have actually standardised on IE/MS Everything in this place (clue) but fscked if I'm going to use it. A combination of Firefox extensions and a NTLM Authorization Proxy Server means I can use a real browser and SSH home to my real operating system...
More info...
On my PIII/700 I can play games like Half Life without major issues as the box far outstrips the minimum requirements for this game but a borderline case like say, GTAIII, where I just about match the recommended spec has very mixed results. Taking the example of GTAIII the compatibility is excellent. The interface, audio and so on react exactly as under Windows but I can only get an unbearable framerate - a graphics card upgrade had little effect... the performance is dropping somewhere else - at API level I guess.
I switched entirely to Linux over a year ago and I plan to sort out a new box (A64) to play DooM 3 - I suppose I'll also pick up UT2K3/4... Maybe I'll get GTAIII back as well
I'm sure freshlegs will appreciate the slashdotting
The reason I was stunned by the situation is that Lexmark offer a Win9x driver for what is essentially exactly the same hardware. It wouldn't cost Dell a lot to include a "legacy" driver on their CD and they might sell a few more printers. They already have driver code to work with! Small changes required! Hell, I might have tried it myself if I had known enough about WinDriver hacking...
The fact that printers are offered individually means people are buying them. I guess at least 10% of people are still using Win9x. That's 10% of a potential customer base cut right out. I know Dell aren't obliged to supply a legacy driver, but not doing so seems to me to be a bit silly given the effort required.
This is a fact - you'll also find that Dell don't provide the same level of driver support on these rebadged pieces of crap.
I recently had an experience where a friend of my Dad bought a Dell printer for his ageing Win98 box. The supplied driver disc was for Win2K/XP only. A little research yielded the fact that the Dell model (A920) was the exact same as the Lexmark X1150. I remember the model numbers due to the trauma involved... Lexmark provide a Win9x driver for this model. Dell don't. Attempts to install the Lexmark driver were hampered by the fact that the printer identified itself as Dell.
Even worse was the fact that upon calling Dell it was suggested he buy a new machine - from Dell of course. I started wondering if there was some specific reason for the lack of support - Surely Win9x support means you would sell more printers! Ah, you want to sell more of those boxes instead...
A friend of my sister works for Dell front line support. I asked him about the situation and he said "yeah, we had a few calls about that..." and nothing else.
Me: Why no 98 driver? The Lexmark version has one - surely a trivial matter for one of your guys to customise it for the Dell version.
Him: But it's a Dell printer - a Lexmark driver won't work.
Me (slapping forehead): Why is there no 98 driver?
Him: Yeah, we had a few calls on that.
Me: I can see how you got that Dell job.
Him: Thanks!
He bought a new box (not from Dell, thankfully) and the old machine was donated to a local school. I guess all's Dell that ends Dell...
You're absolutely right that the amount of feedback isn't a function of the environment, but it is a symptom - and yes, it is the programmer's choice but only to an extent. Each environment only allows for certain types of feedback. I gave the impression in my original post that I don't use a GUI - this is not true. I use KDE quite a lot at home for The GIMP, mozilla and so on. I also have several xterms open with various command line tools like gramofile, transcode, mplex, make and so on running.
When it comes to the information which is fed back from the apps I'm using the command line apps are generally more "polite" and informative - they wait until I'm finished doing what I am doing then I get a progress report from my background process if required. The GUI pops up dialog which demands immediate attention before I can go any further. This is a function of the environment. If you are attempting to do the impossible in an event driven system then you're going to find out about it immediately - fair enough. Thing is, if an app crashes you're going to find out about it immediately. If an app finishes normally it tells you about it. If an app finishes abnormally it tells you about it - it rarely tells you the important stuff, though - even if you do click "More Info..."
Mnyesss, I see... I suggest you read Neal Stephenson's excellent essay In the Beginning Was The Command Line and don't express another opinion on the CLI until you do - but this is merely a suggestion.
Your GUI is a subtle lie about what your system is truly up to. Even the author of TFA expresses a distrust about what the dialogs presented him are hiding:
If I am presented with a choice of spending a few minutes learning a command syntax and being in control of my system or an eternity being presented with deceptive (yes, deceptive - what's the last Windows dialog you saw which told you exactly what was happening?), frustrating dialogs I think you'll find me at the bash shell.
I have been led to believe that this wasn't included due to a statement by the mplayer team that binary packages infringe the GPL.
Not sure how true this is given the respect for software licensing they show by distributing binary wincodecs on their site without the appropriate license agreement.
Fair point. I guess I fail the good listener test!
I could make the excuse that I was using the point in the original post to make a more general point about the topic at hand... *cough*
When it comes to glazing over and not listening, for me it generally comes down to the topic rather than the gender of the speaker. I find it hard to listen to anyone speak about sport, TV, fashion and a hundred other topics. If it's a tech topic or related to my job I can generally stay tuned in.
That said, there are some people who just have a talent for making me drift off. If they have absolutely no passion for, or interest in what they are saying they'll probably get a corresponding response...
Hmmm... I don't see the problem. Was I advocating porn in any form?
The actual reasoning behind this quote has little to do with physical abuse. It is about the nature of human existence and the tendency of humans to reduce horrific situations to a platitude of few words. Depression is handled with "cheer up, it might never happen" and poor socio-economic conditions with "it could be worse". Stanhope was dealing with suicide being "the coward's way out" - pointing out that life is sometimes very hard to deal with and the dismissal of somebody's decision to end their life by calling them a coward is very short sighted. The truth is this person had real problems and had nowhere to turn due to the nature of this society - no other option but to end their life. Their despair had become greater than their survival instinct and the relationships around them. When existence is this dark it is very real and very frightening - to even utter the word "coward" is to admit a complete lack of understanding and compassion, or perhaps it's an ill-conceived attempt to shift blame.
Please tell me how any of this conflicts with my original post? If anything this statement recognises animal porn as one of the more grim cultural outputs of humankind, but since the parent post is AC and ends with an insult I get the feeling IHBT.
I think it's due to the fact that most, if not all us men are driven by that overriding biological imperative, sex. Personally I try not to let it intrude on my platonic and professional relationships and think I am quite successful at this - but I'm never sure
You could help out by pointing it out whenever it happens - ("I'm up here!") but most guys don't even realise their doing it - it's instinct. I have a belief that we are endowed with intelligence to make instinct redundant - intelligence gets you further in life. When's the last time you saw a successful professional (outside management) working solely on the archipallium? Thing is, a lot of the time people have a tendency to abandon their higher functions for a bit of hootin' and hollerin'
Just know that the next time a guy glazes over, becomes a gibbering wreck, acts like a pompous ass or keeps gawking at certain physical attributes it's nothing personal - it's a rush of hormones to the head...
But most geeks are probably loath to admit that
This cannot work for the simple reason that JPEG is designed specifically for lossy compression of photographs and other complex images. Think of it as mp3 type compression - discarding data with quality decreasing proportional to size. A great tool for the dialup age.
PNG compression is entirely unsuited to this purpose - the level of compression for these types of images is terrible. Simple diagrammatical type images compress very well in PNG. Think of it as a zip type compression. Repeated elements of the image, such as whitespace which JPEG doesn't handle very well, are well suited to PNG. Ever zipped a log file? Plenty of repeated elements, great compression.
Converting GIF to PNG? Fine, you'll likely end up with smaller files as a bonus.
*sigh*
Godwin's Law is not meant to be invoked. It's merely an observation: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
I believe it should be seen like Moore's law - merely the result of the observation of a trend, but not set in stone and impossible to enforce in any meaningful manner.
Very nice! I'll check it out at work tomorrow - I don't keep IE on the Linux box at home :)
Good work.
I agree - it's unfortunate situation but it is the reality, yes. Thing is, I'm not in the "real world" - if I was I would surely make the effort to support the widest user base I possibly could.
Couple of points, though - the general rule for corporate sites with poor support is to *only* support IE on Windows. Highly annoying, I think you'll agree. Also, I don't think it's worth the effort of making sure everything is perfect on a personal homepage (unless you want to, of course). I made some effort in getting my site to render in everything from links to firefox, but it looks quite different in each browser. I'm not going to kill myself over that.
I think the only major issue with it on IE is that I use PNGs with transparency - these render with a white background. Oh, and you should still try to get people to switch to a real browser - not customers, but do spend time working with friends and family on this. They'll thank you for it.
They seem to be under the impression that PNG alpha and CSS support are solely in the interests of web developers.
I am no professional when it comes to web design - I'm not going to tailor a site for IE, so if they start to support accepted standards it's purely a bonus for the visitor (or "customer")
Also, if I was a Microsoft customer I would be inclined to find the statement from the article insulting. Back when I was a MS customer I did want things like CSS and PNG support - that's why I used Mozilla. That they assume a zero level of knowledge just because I use their products is probably why I stopped using their products.
Bottom line: Standards support? Don't bet on it - Microsoft didn't get where they are today by supporting open standards, they prefer to invent them.
Haven't been on dialup in a while, have you? You could realistically expect to at least double that time for most dialup users.
Holy shit! Look at your ICQ#! :)