I'm not on a PowerBook now--in fact, I don't think I've ever used one--but if they're anything like the iBooks I remember, don't you need to hold down the Function (fn) key to actually use F2 instead of the brightness control? In other words, CTRL+Fn+F2?
If you read the article, you'd see that the battery looses 1% of life after 1000 charge cycles. So you can see they already last quite a bit longer than typical Li-Ion batteries.
But this ignores loss in capacity that may occur to do other factors, primarily exposure to heat.
CSS 2.1 is the current revision of CSS 2, so when someone asks for CSS 2 support, that's what they mean. It is not a draft; it is in the CR (call for implementations) stage. The only thing that may get fixed is errors in the specs. They're waiting for UAs to implement it.
This comes from Ian Hickson (Hixie), someone who actually worked on the specification, so he knows what he's talking about.
Yes, just like IE 6 SP2 helped because it's so much more secure.
Tabbed browsing is the only thing I'd actually worry about. And they've already stated that they don't intend to fully support CSS 2 because they say they're going to wait for CSS 2.1 or CSS 3 to mature. This statement shows how much they don't understand: CSS 2.1 and CSS 2 are both at the CR stage, and when someone says "CSS 2" support, what they mean now *is* CSS 2.1. That's what you implement if you implement CSS 2. (CSS Level 2, revision 1.) As for CSS 3, I'd say that's a long ways off yet.
Not until my VCR-DVD-whatever-player-of-the-future can read directly from the Internet or other storage (but apparently not DVDs, because they must be going away), and not until everybody has broadband. Speaking of everybody having broadband, that's an issue in itself. It's not available everywhere, and my rural area is one of them. DVDs certainly aren't going anywhere around here, or many other places, if broadband is all that's going to make them "obsolete".
No nerd could possibly love Internet Explorer. At the VERY least, they'd need a decent shell (with, say, tabbed browsing), but with that amount of effort hopefully they'd realize there are better choices.
At least Micro$oft doesnt make you totally re-download IE everytime they patch it.
For most minor updates, Firefox won't either. It would be nice if they could do it here, too (actually--can't the Update feature do it? or at least make it seem like it's just patching instead of downloading the whole thing--I have no idea what it actually would do?), but a 5 MB download certainly isn't too much to ask, and it's actually less than some MS patches. And this is the whole program.
It's an interesting article--but I doubt just drivers would satisfy most people. There's applications they'll want to work, too. (That said, I'd personally be delighted if all my hardware would work under Linux; then I'd never need Windows. But I could just as easily have gotten Linux-friendly hardware... and if you want Linux-ish distro that "just works"... there's OS X.:)
I have a Windows PC without FireWire, but I still use the FireWire cable--to charge the iPod from outlet power.
(For those who aren't familar with it, the AC adapter has a FireWire "port" on it, into which you plug the [formerly] included FireWire cable, which hooks up to the charge/sync/dock port on the bottom of the iPod.)
Worst case, you now need a computer to charge the iPod, or you have to pay $20 (?) extra to get the Firewire cable... BUT, from what I can tell, the optional power adapter now works with the USB cable (at least for the Mini), so you shouldn't need both if you just want to charge without a computer.
Re:When will they update the firmware for old iPod
on
Apple Updates iPod
·
· Score: 1
Sorry, somehow some of my comment got cut off; it should have read:
Which feature? Shuffle songs? If so, a read of Apple's site will show that the only new Mini features are support for the new Mini and support for USB charging on OS X v10.2.8/10.3.4 or later--probably because the Firewire cable is now sold separately on the Mini.
Re:When will they update the firmware for old iPod
on
Apple Updates iPod
·
· Score: 1
I'm pretty sure I've seen that feature on my iPod mini from day 1.
Which feature? Shuffle songs? If so, a read of Apple's site will show that the only new Mini features are support for the new Mini and support for USB charging on OS X v10.2.8/10.3.4 or later-is now sold separately on the Mini.
Anyone notice on the side of the iPod page it says:
Get the most out of your iPod photo. Coming in March, new software lets you:
Choose new slideshow transitions on the go
Upload photos directly from your camera using the optional iPod Camera Connector accessory, also arriving in March
I *would* say it's an indication of an iPhoto-like app for the PC, but it made no mention of being Windows- or Mac-specific, so maybe it's just some other program or iTunes enhancement that would be more appropriate for managing photos on an iPod photo.
Ummmmm... is the combined market share of ALL browsers outside of "Apple (aka Safari), Mozilla, and Opera" and IE even close to 1%?
You haven't kept up with the stats lately, have you?
WebSideStory this January has Firefox alone at 5%, and IE is about 90%. Nobody I know is reporting anything below 1% for the "other guys". Besides Firefox, Opera was at 2.1%, Netscape (maybe including the Moailla suite as well) was at 2.6%, and I don't know about Safari or others.
OneStat even has IE below 90% at 88.9%, and that was last November.
So, yes, the combined non-MS marketshare is certainly more than 1%, which you could have easily found out with a little research.
Is this certain large ISP AOL? If so, I doubt they'd care about memory usage anymore, if--as you mention--that's even an issue now. (They definitely don't care about the size of the program, either.)
But what benefit would they get from removing JavaScript? It's not like you can't disable it (or even just a certain few capabilities of it), and it can't be too much of a tax... especially since they'd need it for a ton of websites anyway, so removing it wouldn't make any sense. I can understand not wanting it in, say, e-mail, but it's safe to say that they'll need it for Web sites.
The school I am looking at for next year (Luther College) blocks all P2P traffic, as I found out this summer.
They're not a tech school, and it's unfortunate because I was hoping I could maybe download a Linux distro or two that users torrents (Xandros). However, I guess there are still plenty that don't, so I shouldn't be too left out. And I would do it from home, but BB isn't available here.
To quote from the site, which I somehow managed to get into:
iPod Linux does not currently run properly on fourth generation, mini, U2 or photo iPods. Repeat: It DOES NOT run. If you try and install the current iPL on a 4g iPod you'll certainly have problems, and you will most likely be eaten by a
grue.
They do say they are working on it, and I'm sure this was a big help. Here's what they say they have done so far:
Kernel Starts
Piezo works
LCD works
Contrast can be adjusted (backlight cannot)
So, you can boot Linux, but they're still a ways away from "running" it.
Scrollbar coloring is supported by many browsers, and the fact that the Mozilla line of browsers doesn't is a failing on its part.
Mozilla could support scrollbar coloring. It can draw either natively-colored or -themed scroll bars, or it can draw them in what the current browser theme specifies (the theme either says "draw them like this" or "go native"). It would certainly be possible.
Many things aren't part of the W3C standards, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't use them. If enough features are used on the internet which people enjoy, then it will force W3C to catch up. That's not to say that alternative methods shouldn't be employed for browsers which don't support these things. I'm all for making a site usable for everyone.
Remind me again what usefulness colored scrollbars have? Scrollbars belong to the browser or the operating system, but not to the Web page.
Forget semantics and standards, what's really important is c0lor3d scrollbars?
Even if you could, flash has a limited number of writes/rewrites (between thousands and hundreds of thousands, as far as I know and depending on whom you believe), and it wouldn't be well-suited for typical use as a "hard drive"--and definitely not one that has a swap file.
And to top it all off, any capacity comparable to that of a hard drive is way more expensive.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not on a PowerBook now--in fact, I don't think I've ever used one--but if they're anything like the iBooks I remember, don't you need to hold down the Function (fn) key to actually use F2 instead of the brightness control? In other words, CTRL+Fn+F2?
If you read the article, you'd see that the battery looses 1% of life after 1000 charge cycles. So you can see they already last quite a bit longer than typical Li-Ion batteries.
But this ignores loss in capacity that may occur to do other factors, primarily exposure to heat.
Their goal is to infect two (specific) computers, not all Macs connected to the Internet.
CSS 2.1 is the current revision of CSS 2, so when someone asks for CSS 2 support, that's what they mean. It is not a draft; it is in the CR (call for implementations) stage. The only thing that may get fixed is errors in the specs. They're waiting for UAs to implement it.
This comes from Ian Hickson (Hixie), someone who actually worked on the specification, so he knows what he's talking about.
Yes, just like IE 6 SP2 helped because it's so much more secure.
Tabbed browsing is the only thing I'd actually worry about. And they've already stated that they don't intend to fully support CSS 2 because they say they're going to wait for CSS 2.1 or CSS 3 to mature. This statement shows how much they don't understand: CSS 2.1 and CSS 2 are both at the CR stage, and when someone says "CSS 2" support, what they mean now *is* CSS 2.1. That's what you implement if you implement CSS 2. (CSS Level 2, revision 1.) As for CSS 3, I'd say that's a long ways off yet.
Did DSL (or any form of broadband for that matter) suddenly become available in all areas?
Long range wireless broadband I'm sure will eventually take care of that problem.
Great. Tell me when someone's (or you've) got that deployed for us, and I'll be sure to try it out. :)
Not until my VCR-DVD-whatever-player-of-the-future can read directly from the Internet or other storage (but apparently not DVDs, because they must be going away), and not until everybody has broadband. Speaking of everybody having broadband, that's an issue in itself. It's not available everywhere, and my rural area is one of them. DVDs certainly aren't going anywhere around here, or many other places, if broadband is all that's going to make them "obsolete".
No nerd could possibly love Internet Explorer. At the VERY least, they'd need a decent shell (with, say, tabbed browsing), but with that amount of effort hopefully they'd realize there are better choices.
200 lines of Python? At least this time they mentioned the additional external libraries, unlike with that "15-line" P2P program a while back...
At least Micro$oft doesnt make you totally re-download IE everytime they patch it.
For most minor updates, Firefox won't either. It would be nice if they could do it here, too (actually--can't the Update feature do it? or at least make it seem like it's just patching instead of downloading the whole thing--I have no idea what it actually would do?), but a 5 MB download certainly isn't too much to ask, and it's actually less than some MS patches. And this is the whole program.
It's an interesting article--but I doubt just drivers would satisfy most people. There's applications they'll want to work, too. (That said, I'd personally be delighted if all my hardware would work under Linux; then I'd never need Windows. But I could just as easily have gotten Linux-friendly hardware ... and if you want Linux-ish distro that "just works" ... there's OS X. :)
I have a Windows PC without FireWire, but I still use the FireWire cable--to charge the iPod from outlet power. (For those who aren't familar with it, the AC adapter has a FireWire "port" on it, into which you plug the [formerly] included FireWire cable, which hooks up to the charge/sync/dock port on the bottom of the iPod.) Worst case, you now need a computer to charge the iPod, or you have to pay $20 (?) extra to get the Firewire cable ... BUT, from what I can tell, the optional power adapter now works with the USB cable (at least for the Mini), so you shouldn't need both if you just want to charge without a computer.
Sorry, somehow some of my comment got cut off; it should have read:
Which feature? Shuffle songs? If so, a read of Apple's site will show that the only new Mini features are support for the new Mini and support for USB charging on OS X v10.2.8/10.3.4 or later--probably because the Firewire cable is now sold separately on the Mini.
I'm pretty sure I've seen that feature on my iPod mini from day 1.
Which feature? Shuffle songs? If so, a read of Apple's site will show that the only new Mini features are support for the new Mini and support for USB charging on OS X v10.2.8/10.3.4 or later-is now sold separately on the Mini.
Anyone notice on the side of the iPod page it says:
Get the most out of your iPod photo. Coming in March, new software lets you:
I *would* say it's an indication of an iPhoto-like app for the PC, but it made no mention of being Windows- or Mac-specific, so maybe it's just some other program or iTunes enhancement that would be more appropriate for managing photos on an iPod photo.
It's Firefox, not FireFox. :)
Small, I know, but annoying.
Ummmmm ... is the combined market share of ALL browsers outside of "Apple (aka Safari), Mozilla, and Opera" and IE even close to 1%?
You haven't kept up with the stats lately, have you?
WebSideStory this January has Firefox alone at 5%, and IE is about 90%. Nobody I know is reporting anything below 1% for the "other guys". Besides Firefox, Opera was at 2.1%, Netscape (maybe including the Moailla suite as well) was at 2.6%, and I don't know about Safari or others.
OneStat even has IE below 90% at 88.9%, and that was last November.
So, yes, the combined non-MS marketshare is certainly more than 1%, which you could have easily found out with a little research.
From what I hear, he's actually planning to put the department on a watch list in accordance with the No Department Left Behind Act.
Is this certain large ISP AOL? If so, I doubt they'd care about memory usage anymore, if--as you mention--that's even an issue now. (They definitely don't care about the size of the program, either.) But what benefit would they get from removing JavaScript? It's not like you can't disable it (or even just a certain few capabilities of it), and it can't be too much of a tax ... especially since they'd need it for a ton of websites anyway, so removing it wouldn't make any sense. I can understand not wanting it in, say, e-mail, but it's safe to say that they'll need it for Web sites.
Instead, they ship with a similarly sized heat sink.
The school I am looking at for next year (Luther College) blocks all P2P traffic, as I found out this summer. They're not a tech school, and it's unfortunate because I was hoping I could maybe download a Linux distro or two that users torrents (Xandros). However, I guess there are still plenty that don't, so I shouldn't be too left out. And I would do it from home, but BB isn't available here.
To quote from the site, which I somehow managed to get into:
They do say they are working on it, and I'm sure this was a big help. Here's what they say they have done so far:
So, you can boot Linux, but they're still a ways away from "running" it.
Scrollbar coloring is supported by many browsers, and the fact that the Mozilla line of browsers doesn't is a failing on its part.
Mozilla could support scrollbar coloring. It can draw either natively-colored or -themed scroll bars, or it can draw them in what the current browser theme specifies (the theme either says "draw them like this" or "go native"). It would certainly be possible.
Many things aren't part of the W3C standards, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't use them. If enough features are used on the internet which people enjoy, then it will force W3C to catch up. That's not to say that alternative methods shouldn't be employed for browsers which don't support these things. I'm all for making a site usable for everyone.
Remind me again what usefulness colored scrollbars have? Scrollbars belong to the browser or the operating system, but not to the Web page.
Forget semantics and standards, what's really important is c0lor3d scrollbars?
Even if you could, flash has a limited number of writes/rewrites (between thousands and hundreds of thousands, as far as I know and depending on whom you believe), and it wouldn't be well-suited for typical use as a "hard drive"--and definitely not one that has a swap file. And to top it all off, any capacity comparable to that of a hard drive is way more expensive.