I'd agree about OS 10.0, but, for me at least, OS 9 was worse. It required hard rebooting at least three times a day (on several computers, so it wasn't a hardware issue) would not run more than one application at a time, and was a pain in the arse with it's manual memory management. OS X 10.0 had features missing, and had some pretty annoying bugs, but it was literally orders of magnitude more stable than what had gone before it. I'm not sure this really lets it of the hook... but it wasn't a step backward.
Yeah, and in my day to day life, I noticed jack shit of that.
Truth is, for me at least, my interface with government is quite small, and the bits that change even smaller. If I want to care about the state of pop music instead, well, what's wrong with that?
I doubt it. The cognitive load of liking a wider variety of music is probably too high. I don't say this to be condescending--I have a wider taste in music than just about anyone I know, but I still go through phases. Skipping from one genre to another too quickly is... uncomfortable.
People like things to be comfortable, there's nothing wrong with that. The X-Factor music though, well it's really pretty bad. We could have a better mainstream. Heck, I think the mainstream from the 50s to the 90s was okay. The mainstream's gone downhill (possibly because people with different tastes have splintered into subcultures).
No it isn't really, because having seen a few changes of government, I'm more and more convinced they affect these things very little. The economy (which I don't think governments control) is responsible for more.
Maybe things are different in the US (politics seems to be more polarised there), but in the UK and Australia, there is general agreement on how most of these things are handled; and where there are policy differences, they often don't come to pass.
The biggest changes governments seem to be able to make is renaming some departments (usually to something stupid that was designed by a marketing consultant).
Now if you REALLY wanted to show you could change mass marketing, you would have gotten NOBODY to buy ANY song.
And just how the fuck would you do that? You can't prevent the people that like x-factor one hit wonder buying the single because THEY LIKE IT. They aren't going to protest it.
If I don't watch the news, who is in power makes zero impact on my life. Government is ossified, changeless, and (I think) relatively powerless. Music, on the other hand, does play a role in my day to day life. You hear it everywhere. If I can hear "Killing in the Name" instead of that awful pop-idol shit several times a day over christmas, well that's a difference I'm interested in making!
Horseshit. IE 6 works in a very different way. The box model is that most obvious, but there are many, many other little things that bite you in the arse if you're doing anything remotely complex with CSS. And don't get me started on javascript...
And that fine too. I don't see why any browser should have more than 20-25% share. Looks like we're heading somewhere even better than replacing IE with Firefox.
Is it good new for Firefox? I think it's more good news for all alternate browsers as a whole. We're almost back to where we were around 2000 where there were many different browsers in use before IE sewed up the market for half a decade.
Anecdotally, I've found this to be true. Back in 2006-7, I was still coming across sites that were buggy or didn't really work at all in anything but IE. I haven't hit anything like that in a couple of years. Every site appears to be tested for Firefox, and therefore will work in all the standards-based browsers (small quirks aside).
This might also be attributable to the rise in Mac usage--if you're on a Mac, you can't just launch IE because a page doesn't work in your browser of choice (VMs excepted, but I'm not launching a VM just to look at some stupid website). Shutting out Mac users used to mean shutting out a tiny percentage of weirdos, now it's more akin to shutting out the richest tenth of your potential customers.
Scientific papers are distributed as PDFs, which is a fairly substantial (and important) market. Of course, there's little reason to use Adobe Reader itself, as there are plenty of alternatives.
You're right that HTML5 won't be in all browsers for a damn long time, but there's a good chance lot of the trendier websites (youtube, facebook, etc.) will start ignoring IE6 pretty soon. I think it's fairly clear that what's it propping it up are corporate intranets, and a lot of sites may just give up in the browsing from work on IE6 market.
Small sites may take the leap as well. I'm thinking of stopping IE6 testing on my personal site... I'm sure a lot of other one-man shows are thinking a similar thing.
No, I think we desperately need competition in the area. I have thousand of man-hours sunk into Adobe's formats, because there aren't realistic choices. It would be a massive headache to have to move to different formats in new applications that might not do a particularly good job of importing old abandonware files.
What we need is for competition to force Adobe into a position where they have to a agree to open standards for their file formats. That's what I want, not the bankruptcy of a company that I believe still makes some really good software.
Well, there are an awful lot of struggling/semi-professional graphic designers/artists/freelancers out there. A long tail of people who I suspect make up a significant proportion of adobe's market, or potential market.
Obviously, I don't know this for sure. But when I worked in post-production I saw an endless stream of people who needed adobe products to ply their trade, who were lucky to make the cost of their software in a month. They were stuck in Adobe's (pointless) upgrade cycle because the studios they worked for upgraded, and they need to be interoperable.
There are so many little bugs in Adobe's products that have remained since I first used them, I think it's pretty obvious the codebase is stagnant.
If they rewrote a significant part of Flash, I can't believe they'd leave it in its Macromedia-ish state. Its animating tools should feel like a blend of Illustrator and After Effects, not the very strange mix of vector and bitmap behaviour it has now.
No more Photoshop, no more Illustrator, no more After Effects...
You know, Adobe's apps make the graphic design/post production/digital art world go round, even if we regret that it is a single company doing it. Their high end professional applications are generally pretty good (yes , overpriced, and 'upgraded' too often with pointless features, but still). I'm not sure I'd like to see them go abandonware.
But calendering ISN'T built in to TB3. They canceled that a few months back. In fact, Lightning isn't even officially compatible with TB3 yet (yes, you can get nightly that are, but that hardly counts).
I don't want to browse in my email client, and I'm not sure why you would, but each to their own I guess. I'm quite disappointed in TB3, but I'll probably keep using it.
Slashdot Mirror
Curious, but where are you from that "are" and "our" are homophones?
I'd agree about OS 10.0, but, for me at least, OS 9 was worse. It required hard rebooting at least three times a day (on several computers, so it wasn't a hardware issue) would not run more than one application at a time, and was a pain in the arse with it's manual memory management. OS X 10.0 had features missing, and had some pretty annoying bugs, but it was literally orders of magnitude more stable than what had gone before it. I'm not sure this really lets it of the hook... but it wasn't a step backward.
Yeah, and in my day to day life, I noticed jack shit of that.
Truth is, for me at least, my interface with government is quite small, and the bits that change even smaller. If I want to care about the state of pop music instead, well, what's wrong with that?
I doubt it. The cognitive load of liking a wider variety of music is probably too high. I don't say this to be condescending--I have a wider taste in music than just about anyone I know, but I still go through phases. Skipping from one genre to another too quickly is... uncomfortable.
People like things to be comfortable, there's nothing wrong with that. The X-Factor music though, well it's really pretty bad. We could have a better mainstream. Heck, I think the mainstream from the 50s to the 90s was okay. The mainstream's gone downhill (possibly because people with different tastes have splintered into subcultures).
No it isn't really, because having seen a few changes of government, I'm more and more convinced they affect these things very little. The economy (which I don't think governments control) is responsible for more.
Maybe things are different in the US (politics seems to be more polarised there), but in the UK and Australia, there is general agreement on how most of these things are handled; and where there are policy differences, they often don't come to pass.
The biggest changes governments seem to be able to make is renaming some departments (usually to something stupid that was designed by a marketing consultant).
Being "brainwashed" into liking something doesn't negate you liking it. In fact, it entails it.
Well, it depends on whether you think a religion is a set of doctrines or a social construction.
Now if you REALLY wanted to show you could change mass marketing, you would have gotten NOBODY to buy ANY song.
And just how the fuck would you do that? You can't prevent the people that like x-factor one hit wonder buying the single because THEY LIKE IT. They aren't going to protest it.
If I don't watch the news, who is in power makes zero impact on my life. Government is ossified, changeless, and (I think) relatively powerless. Music, on the other hand, does play a role in my day to day life. You hear it everywhere. If I can hear "Killing in the Name" instead of that awful pop-idol shit several times a day over christmas, well that's a difference I'm interested in making!
My feet are getting cold...
No, it's not "no matter what the percentage". Do people code website for IE 5 for Mac? No? Why? Or even IE 5 for Windows?
At some point, everyone will give up on IE 6 because it's a pain to code for, and not enough people are using it.
Horseshit. IE 6 works in a very different way. The box model is that most obvious, but there are many, many other little things that bite you in the arse if you're doing anything remotely complex with CSS. And don't get me started on javascript...
And that fine too. I don't see why any browser should have more than 20-25% share. Looks like we're heading somewhere even better than replacing IE with Firefox.
Is it good new for Firefox? I think it's more good news for all alternate browsers as a whole. We're almost back to where we were around 2000 where there were many different browsers in use before IE sewed up the market for half a decade.
Anecdotally, I've found this to be true. Back in 2006-7, I was still coming across sites that were buggy or didn't really work at all in anything but IE. I haven't hit anything like that in a couple of years. Every site appears to be tested for Firefox, and therefore will work in all the standards-based browsers (small quirks aside).
This might also be attributable to the rise in Mac usage--if you're on a Mac, you can't just launch IE because a page doesn't work in your browser of choice (VMs excepted, but I'm not launching a VM just to look at some stupid website). Shutting out Mac users used to mean shutting out a tiny percentage of weirdos, now it's more akin to shutting out the richest tenth of your potential customers.
Scientific papers are distributed as PDFs, which is a fairly substantial (and important) market. Of course, there's little reason to use Adobe Reader itself, as there are plenty of alternatives.
Oh well, let's wait for TB4...
Yeah, TB4! Unfortunately, it release clashes with a skiing holiday I have booked.. in hell.
Oh burn.
Err, no. In fact, I've never heard an Australian or a Brit refer to it, ever.
No, I don't think that's the case. In the media world a whole lot depends on how well you schmooze. Talent is not a ticket to money.
You're right that HTML5 won't be in all browsers for a damn long time, but there's a good chance lot of the trendier websites (youtube, facebook, etc.) will start ignoring IE6 pretty soon. I think it's fairly clear that what's it propping it up are corporate intranets, and a lot of sites may just give up in the browsing from work on IE6 market.
Small sites may take the leap as well. I'm thinking of stopping IE6 testing on my personal site... I'm sure a lot of other one-man shows are thinking a similar thing.
No, I think we desperately need competition in the area. I have thousand of man-hours sunk into Adobe's formats, because there aren't realistic choices. It would be a massive headache to have to move to different formats in new applications that might not do a particularly good job of importing old abandonware files.
What we need is for competition to force Adobe into a position where they have to a agree to open standards for their file formats. That's what I want, not the bankruptcy of a company that I believe still makes some really good software.
Well, there are an awful lot of struggling/semi-professional graphic designers/artists/freelancers out there. A long tail of people who I suspect make up a significant proportion of adobe's market, or potential market.
Obviously, I don't know this for sure. But when I worked in post-production I saw an endless stream of people who needed adobe products to ply their trade, who were lucky to make the cost of their software in a month. They were stuck in Adobe's (pointless) upgrade cycle because the studios they worked for upgraded, and they need to be interoperable.
There are so many little bugs in Adobe's products that have remained since I first used them, I think it's pretty obvious the codebase is stagnant.
If they rewrote a significant part of Flash, I can't believe they'd leave it in its Macromedia-ish state. Its animating tools should feel like a blend of Illustrator and After Effects, not the very strange mix of vector and bitmap behaviour it has now.
No more Photoshop, no more Illustrator, no more After Effects...
You know, Adobe's apps make the graphic design/post production/digital art world go round, even if we regret that it is a single company doing it. Their high end professional applications are generally pretty good (yes , overpriced, and 'upgraded' too often with pointless features, but still). I'm not sure I'd like to see them go abandonware.
Yeah the interface still needs serious work. It all the new features (with the exception of tabs) look pretty out of place on a mac.
But calendering ISN'T built in to TB3. They canceled that a few months back. In fact, Lightning isn't even officially compatible with TB3 yet (yes, you can get nightly that are, but that hardly counts).
I don't want to browse in my email client, and I'm not sure why you would, but each to their own I guess. I'm quite disappointed in TB3, but I'll probably keep using it.