A Plan for the Improvement of English Spelling by Mark Twain
For example, in Year 1 that useless letter "c" would be dropped to be replased either by "k" or "s", and likewise "x" would no longer be part of the alphabet. The only kase in which "c" would be retained would be the "ch" formation, which will be dealt with later. Year 2 might reform "w" spelling, so that "which" and "one" would take the same konsonant, wile Year 3 might well abolish "y" replasing it with "i" and Iear 4 might fiks the "g/j" anomali wonse and for all. Jenerally, then, the improvement would kontinue iear bai iear with Iear 5 doing awai with useless double konsonants, and Iears 6-12 or so modifaiing vowlz and the rimeining voist and unvoist konsonants. Bai Iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi ridandant letez "c", "y" and "x" -- bai now jast a memori in the maindz ov ould doderez -- tu riplais "ch", "sh", and "th" rispektivli. Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iers ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld.
First of all, it is a free browser, they have no obligation to fix anything. Buy a shirt, then whine.
Um, no - maybe they can pay *me* for my consulting services? But I graciously donate that. Either way, I certainly do *not* have to pay in order to voice my opinions.
And I certainly have no obligation to test the thing and find things for them to fix. So the lack of obligation works both ways. If I won't test and they won't fix, then I'm thinking the software's going to suck. So why don't we both volunteer to do our parts and stop pretending like it's some honor to be *allowed* to crashtest beta browsers and voice ideas for improving them?
That said, I use mozilla - I could care less about a piece hacked out of mozilla to try to emulate IE - except that it's slated to replace the browser I choose to use. It's just the attitude that I should purchase my right to speak that gets under my skin. And the attitude that disgreement and criticism is not a useful, even necessary, activity but should be dismissed as 'whining'.
First of all, it is a free browser, they have no obligation to fix anything. Buy a shirt, then whine.
Um, no - maybe they can pay *me* for my consulting services? But I graciously donate that. Either way, I certainly do *not* have to pay in order to voice my opinions.
And I certainly have no obligation to test the thing and find things for them to fix. So the lack of obligation works both ways. If I won't test and they won't fix, then I'm thinking the software's going to suck. So why don't we both volunteer to do our parts and stop pretending like it's some honor to be *allowed* to crashtest beta browsers and voice ideas for improving them?
That said, I use mozilla - I could care less about a piece hacked out of mozilla to try to emulate IE - except that it's slated to replace the browser I choose to use. It's just the attitude that I should purchase my right to speak that gets under my skin. And the attitude that disgreement and criticism is not a useful, even necessary, activity but should be dismissed as 'whining'.
I do. I came to Mozilla when Phoenix was a semi-comatose project and Thunderbird wasn't a glimmer in the developers' eyes. Finally, I found a browser I *loved* that made surfing the net enjoyable rather than infuriating. So there's partly just loyalty to a trusted workhorse.
I did try an early Phoenix and a few later ones including Firebirds and I found the interface too IE-like for my taste. I disliked the Windows-ized limitation of easily settable options that would 'confuse' the user. I disliked not having my mail connected to my browser. (A good chunk of my mail contains links to places and it's nice to just click on it and have it open in my browser.)
Those who accuse Mozilla of being ugly apparently don't know how to install themes - I loved gashu's lofi and, since he hasn't updated in a long time, I've been happy with the 'rain' theme which goes nice with ice (the Infadel IceWM theme, slightly modified).
Those who accuse it of being slow - well, it's not right for all systems but it opens in about 2.5 seconds on my box (1.1GHz Athlon, with either Slack or sometimes Gentoo) and stays open indefinitely after that. Dillo launches instantaneously - faster than Firebird. Net savings: maximum of 2 seconds a day. *twirls finger* And it renders pages as fast as anything. Back when I used Windows, the quick launch/pre launch, whatever it was called, made it nearly as fast as the always preloaded IE.
I dunno. I just love it. A more pertinent question might be: given Mozilla's excellence, what need was there to split it and why would people switch? The only advantage I see is saving 2 seconds a day - otherwise, there's fewer options, more trouble coordinating two apps, and so on.
I haven't added up the disk usage and memory footprint but if you added the Birds it's probably not that big of a savings - maybe even none. Particularly if you add in the equivalents of the other components. Which will probably never be developed to a particularly high level - most lagged behind in the suite - they'll die completely split apart.
Sorry for the ramble, but I love my mozilla and hope for many more versions after 1.6.
Probably way late for this but what the hell - other than interviews 2-3 months apart and a little give and take at the forum (where I spend too much time) there is no followup. As I understand it, these are emails sent out to the interviewees. Then they spend days agonizing over the precise to words to use, ponder for awhile to find 'spontaneous' funny comments to throw in, and so on. People earlier (much earlier) have stated how he seemed like a *real guy* - not at all saying he isn't but he could be a robot and have time to generate such an impression. I get the idea some people mistake this for a transcript of a live interview when - again, as I understand it - it aresn't.
So I wouldn't be surprised that the level of spin control is high and that the questions can't be as hard-hitting as they might be. jeremy (interviewer, not Jeremy, interviewee) does a great job, nonetheless.
It's easy to picture Microsoft using its Windows monopoly to lasso people into using its search--even if its search is slightly clunkier than Google's. That scenario won't happen, says Brin. He thinks the company with the superior technology will triumph...
Yep. It always has been that way in the past. Superior technology has always vanquished Microsoft's clunkiness.
I don't trust this article - coming from Forbes - and that's a reporter's paraphrase, at best, rather than a quote of Brin, but that much seems a reasonable portrayal of their attitude, and an Achilles' heel. This goofy belief that some tech god will see to it that the technically inept cannot prevail in combat.
Still, I agree with a post above - having *a* search engine for the net is not something I'd be rooting for anyway.
Exactly. If I install dosemu with MS-DOS and use something from it I'm not suddenly using the MS/GNU/Linux operating system, and how would Stallman feel if everybody called it that? I'd be using the Linux OS with GNU and DOS tools. And amen for GNU tools which blow most other tools in the universe away but 'GNU/Linux' is frankly a dumb and unappealing term, aside from being philosophically ambiguous and technically incorrect.
Slashdot Mirror
Um, no - maybe they can pay *me* for my consulting services? But I graciously donate that. Either way, I certainly do *not* have to pay in order to voice my opinions.
And I certainly have no obligation to test the thing and find things for them to fix. So the lack of obligation works both ways. If I won't test and they won't fix, then I'm thinking the software's going to suck. So why don't we both volunteer to do our parts and stop pretending like it's some honor to be *allowed* to crashtest beta browsers and voice ideas for improving them?
That said, I use mozilla - I could care less about a piece hacked out of mozilla to try to emulate IE - except that it's slated to replace the browser I choose to use. It's just the attitude that I should purchase my right to speak that gets under my skin. And the attitude that disgreement and criticism is not a useful, even necessary, activity but should be dismissed as 'whining'.
-- Sorry. What, me preview?
First of all, it is a free browser, they have no obligation to fix anything. Buy a shirt, then whine. Um, no - maybe they can pay *me* for my consulting services? But I graciously donate that. Either way, I certainly do *not* have to pay in order to voice my opinions. And I certainly have no obligation to test the thing and find things for them to fix. So the lack of obligation works both ways. If I won't test and they won't fix, then I'm thinking the software's going to suck. So why don't we both volunteer to do our parts and stop pretending like it's some honor to be *allowed* to crashtest beta browsers and voice ideas for improving them? That said, I use mozilla - I could care less about a piece hacked out of mozilla to try to emulate IE - except that it's slated to replace the browser I choose to use. It's just the attitude that I should purchase my right to speak that gets under my skin. And the attitude that disgreement and criticism is not a useful, even necessary, activity but should be dismissed as 'whining'.
I did try an early Phoenix and a few later ones including Firebirds and I found the interface too IE-like for my taste. I disliked the Windows-ized limitation of easily settable options that would 'confuse' the user. I disliked not having my mail connected to my browser. (A good chunk of my mail contains links to places and it's nice to just click on it and have it open in my browser.)
Those who accuse Mozilla of being ugly apparently don't know how to install themes - I loved gashu's lofi and, since he hasn't updated in a long time, I've been happy with the 'rain' theme which goes nice with ice (the Infadel IceWM theme, slightly modified).
Those who accuse it of being slow - well, it's not right for all systems but it opens in about 2.5 seconds on my box (1.1GHz Athlon, with either Slack or sometimes Gentoo) and stays open indefinitely after that. Dillo launches instantaneously - faster than Firebird. Net savings: maximum of 2 seconds a day. *twirls finger* And it renders pages as fast as anything. Back when I used Windows, the quick launch/pre launch, whatever it was called, made it nearly as fast as the always preloaded IE.
I dunno. I just love it. A more pertinent question might be: given Mozilla's excellence, what need was there to split it and why would people switch? The only advantage I see is saving 2 seconds a day - otherwise, there's fewer options, more trouble coordinating two apps, and so on.
I haven't added up the disk usage and memory footprint but if you added the Birds it's probably not that big of a savings - maybe even none. Particularly if you add in the equivalents of the other components. Which will probably never be developed to a particularly high level - most lagged behind in the suite - they'll die completely split apart.
Sorry for the ramble, but I love my mozilla and hope for many more versions after 1.6.
Probably way late for this but what the hell - other than interviews 2-3 months apart and a little give and take at the forum (where I spend too much time) there is no followup. As I understand it, these are emails sent out to the interviewees. Then they spend days agonizing over the precise to words to use, ponder for awhile to find 'spontaneous' funny comments to throw in, and so on. People earlier (much earlier) have stated how he seemed like a *real guy* - not at all saying he isn't but he could be a robot and have time to generate such an impression. I get the idea some people mistake this for a transcript of a live interview when - again, as I understand it - it aresn't.
So I wouldn't be surprised that the level of spin control is high and that the questions can't be as hard-hitting as they might be. jeremy (interviewer, not Jeremy, interviewee) does a great job, nonetheless.
Yep. It always has been that way in the past. Superior technology has always vanquished Microsoft's clunkiness.
I don't trust this article - coming from Forbes - and that's a reporter's paraphrase, at best, rather than a quote of Brin, but that much seems a reasonable portrayal of their attitude, and an Achilles' heel. This goofy belief that some tech god will see to it that the technically inept cannot prevail in combat.
Still, I agree with a post above - having *a* search engine for the net is not something I'd be rooting for anyway.
Exactly. If I install dosemu with MS-DOS and use something from it I'm not suddenly using the MS/GNU/Linux operating system, and how would Stallman feel if everybody called it that? I'd be using the Linux OS with GNU and DOS tools. And amen for GNU tools which blow most other tools in the universe away but 'GNU/Linux' is frankly a dumb and unappealing term, aside from being philosophically ambiguous and technically incorrect.