Remember X10? Those pop-ups were annoying as all hell. But the company's long out of business, and we still know who they are! Many companies would kill to get that kind of name recognition in such a (relatively) short period of time.
And remember, there's a sucker born every minute. We're a little more savvy around here (maybe just a little), but there are people who actually click. And people who believe the ridiculous claims in spam emails. Sad but true.
Actually, content is the second-hardest part. Dealing with clients is the worst. If you're your own client (designing a personal site, let's say), this is not a problem at all, unless you're a crazy perfectionist. I "retired" from professional design and only do work for myself and close friends. Apparently I have a low threshold for taking other people's crap, no matter how much they're paying.
Technical problems place a distant third, and it would be even less of an issue if IE didn't exist.:-P
Actually, cost winds up being time and money, especially the latter if it's on the company dime. Mind you I took the time--I've been doing professional design, web and print, since 1997. (Don't let the 1337-speak name fool you. I have an admittedly acquired taste for irony.) But I've known many a client who wanted results now, if not yesterday. It took me years to hone my talent, to figure out the idiosyncracies of every browser and platform combination, etc. To me it was worth it, but not everybody wants to make that investment.
Maybe. But having been in the business before, lots of the entries on that site are submitted by the original designers themselves. Designers are none too happy when they discover that their work--worth thousands of dollars in some cases--was ripped off by someone paid $50 (or even less).
I seriously hope you're kidding. It's easy, and it's incredibly tempting. Some people might even be impressed by "your" handiwork. Then the person or company you ripped off will find out eventually. If they're a large corporation, they may send a pack of bloodthirsty intellectual property lawyers your way. Even if you get away with as little as a cease-and-desist order, you're going to wind up having to re-do your site, probably at great expense, unless you want to take your chances and copy another one. You'll also be mocked by creative types, who will be more than happy to send streams of irate emails (and possibly phone calls) your way. Then it begins to affect your bottom line, because by now your customers will have found out. Discouraged by your less-than-honest practices, will consider taking their business elsewhere.
In short: do it right, and do it yourself (or pay reputable creative professionals to do it for you).
Technically, yes. But the child windows are presented as tabs, instead of merely entries in a Window menu or as a bunch of awkward shrunken title bars at the bottom of the screen (or whatever). The actual technology may be old, but the specific implementation is relatively new.
My computer is an almost four year-old Celeron 1.1 GHz, and Firefox 1.0 is downright snappy. Even Mozilla 1.0 ran at acceptable speeds on my old Pentium 166, and that deserved the slow and bloated label.
That said, good point. But the Firefox devs have stated time and again that the goal of Firefox is to have just a browser without the nasty feature creep of the Mozilla suite.
On a slightly related (though possibly off-topic note), I saw a Pentium 4-based point-of-sale terminal (POS terminal...hehe...) in a Dell catalog. Why the hell do you need a PENTIUM 4 in a glorified cash register? I can see it now, Quake 3 LAN parties in my local grocery store after hours...
Moral of the story: pretty colors and animations be damned. When it comes to my money, I just want it to work. Period.
How about this: it just works, with little to no fuss on the desktop.
Seriously. I love Linux, and I'm the type who doesn't mind tinkering around. Hell, I use it on my desktop (and that says a lot). But working on a Mac? Drop-dead simple. System installs are a no-brainer, just a few clicks and you're off to the races. So are application installs--no need to worry about dependencies or compiler problems. In some cases (MS Office and OmniWeb come to mind), just drop a file or folder into the Applications folder, and that's it! Hardware installs? Plug and play done right, I say, even if it can't recognize every device under the sun. (Then again, Linux can't claim that either.) And if you really feel the need to work at a shell prompt, Terminal's right there waiting for you. And with 10.3, there's even an X11 server built-in. Best of both worlds!
And it's not so much that OS X can't run on anything but Macs. Technically, it probably could, seeing as there's a version of Darwin for x86 architectures. (There are even rumors that Apple runs some internal builds of OS X on Intel hardware.) It's just that Apple doesn't want OS X to run on anything but Macs. We're talking marketing here, not engineering. Subtle but important distinction.
All right, so Linux is versatile enough to run in embedded devices. That's certainly noteworthy. But Linux is still a weak contender on the desktop. OS X (at least the consumer version) is designed specifically as a desktop operating system. And it does it pretty damn well in that capacity, IMHO, which is more than good enough for me. And it occurs to me that if Apple really wanted to make a version of OS X for embedded computing, they sure as hell could. Darwin is a BSD-derivative, and BSD's pretty svelte. And they'd have enough motivation--imagine the graphical goodness of Aqua on an iPod (something they might do if they decide to give the iPod video-playback capability). It could happen.
Slashdot Mirror
...or, if you don't want to use Filterset.G, here's the specific rule used:
@@/\.google\.\w{2,3}/search\?/
Filterset.G, when used with Adblock Plus, has a whitelist rule that allows Gmail to work properly. At least I haven't encountered any problems.
Check under Preferences, and if you do enough digging, you'll find an option to change or eliminate the gap between tracks.
Because it works.
Remember X10? Those pop-ups were annoying as all hell. But the company's long out of business, and we still know who they are! Many companies would kill to get that kind of name recognition in such a (relatively) short period of time.
And remember, there's a sucker born every minute. We're a little more savvy around here (maybe just a little), but there are people who actually click. And people who believe the ridiculous claims in spam emails. Sad but true.
Actually, content is the second-hardest part. Dealing with clients is the worst. If you're your own client (designing a personal site, let's say), this is not a problem at all, unless you're a crazy perfectionist. I "retired" from professional design and only do work for myself and close friends. Apparently I have a low threshold for taking other people's crap, no matter how much they're paying.
Technical problems place a distant third, and it would be even less of an issue if IE didn't exist. :-P
To each their own. But I should probably point out that she's married, to another big name in web design, no less.
Actually, cost winds up being time and money, especially the latter if it's on the company dime. Mind you I took the time--I've been doing professional design, web and print, since 1997. (Don't let the 1337-speak name fool you. I have an admittedly acquired taste for irony.) But I've known many a client who wanted results now, if not yesterday. It took me years to hone my talent, to figure out the idiosyncracies of every browser and platform combination, etc. To me it was worth it, but not everybody wants to make that investment.
Maybe. But having been in the business before, lots of the entries on that site are submitted by the original designers themselves. Designers are none too happy when they discover that their work--worth thousands of dollars in some cases--was ripped off by someone paid $50 (or even less).
Pity sarcasm is so difficult to convey over the internet. Though given the incredibly deadpan way you said it, I had a feeling. :-)
I seriously hope you're kidding. It's easy, and it's incredibly tempting. Some people might even be impressed by "your" handiwork. Then the person or company you ripped off will find out eventually. If they're a large corporation, they may send a pack of bloodthirsty intellectual property lawyers your way. Even if you get away with as little as a cease-and-desist order, you're going to wind up having to re-do your site, probably at great expense, unless you want to take your chances and copy another one. You'll also be mocked by creative types, who will be more than happy to send streams of irate emails (and possibly phone calls) your way. Then it begins to affect your bottom line, because by now your customers will have found out. Discouraged by your less-than-honest practices, will consider taking their business elsewhere.
In short: do it right, and do it yourself (or pay reputable creative professionals to do it for you).
Technically, yes. But the child windows are presented as tabs, instead of merely entries in a Window menu or as a bunch of awkward shrunken title bars at the bottom of the screen (or whatever). The actual technology may be old, but the specific implementation is relatively new.
My computer is an almost four year-old Celeron 1.1 GHz, and Firefox 1.0 is downright snappy. Even Mozilla 1.0 ran at acceptable speeds on my old Pentium 166, and that deserved the slow and bloated label.
That said, good point. But the Firefox devs have stated time and again that the goal of Firefox is to have just a browser without the nasty feature creep of the Mozilla suite.
The screenshot link in the original post has been Slashdotted. Here's a mirror:
http://tuggy.home.sapo.pt/gnome/
(Here's hoping this doesn't get Slashdotted too quickly!)
On a slightly related (though possibly off-topic note), I saw a Pentium 4-based point-of-sale terminal (POS terminal...hehe...) in a Dell catalog. Why the hell do you need a PENTIUM 4 in a glorified cash register? I can see it now, Quake 3 LAN parties in my local grocery store after hours...
Moral of the story: pretty colors and animations be damned. When it comes to my money, I just want it to work. Period.
How about this: it just works, with little to no fuss on the desktop.
Seriously. I love Linux, and I'm the type who doesn't mind tinkering around. Hell, I use it on my desktop (and that says a lot). But working on a Mac? Drop-dead simple. System installs are a no-brainer, just a few clicks and you're off to the races. So are application installs--no need to worry about dependencies or compiler problems. In some cases (MS Office and OmniWeb come to mind), just drop a file or folder into the Applications folder, and that's it! Hardware installs? Plug and play done right, I say, even if it can't recognize every device under the sun. (Then again, Linux can't claim that either.) And if you really feel the need to work at a shell prompt, Terminal's right there waiting for you. And with 10.3, there's even an X11 server built-in. Best of both worlds!
And it's not so much that OS X can't run on anything but Macs. Technically, it probably could, seeing as there's a version of Darwin for x86 architectures. (There are even rumors that Apple runs some internal builds of OS X on Intel hardware.) It's just that Apple doesn't want OS X to run on anything but Macs. We're talking marketing here, not engineering. Subtle but important distinction.
All right, so Linux is versatile enough to run in embedded devices. That's certainly noteworthy. But Linux is still a weak contender on the desktop. OS X (at least the consumer version) is designed specifically as a desktop operating system. And it does it pretty damn well in that capacity, IMHO, which is more than good enough for me. And it occurs to me that if Apple really wanted to make a version of OS X for embedded computing, they sure as hell could. Darwin is a BSD-derivative, and BSD's pretty svelte. And they'd have enough motivation--imagine the graphical goodness of Aqua on an iPod (something they might do if they decide to give the iPod video-playback capability). It could happen.