The thing is that Slashdot is now natively readable from within Lynx or Links (only with they put some kind of link on top of the page pointing to the content itself, having to go through 5 pages of menu before actually reaching the content is annoying)
Bullshit all the way, you can have a just as good markup in HTML4.01 Strict as you can have in XHTML 1.0 Strict (given the fact that they're, like, exactly the same thing but for XHTML1.0 being XML and HTML4.01 being SGML)
And XHTML actually isn't trivial given the fact that both CSS and Javascript behavioral changes can be noticed.
point 2. Does not compute.
Even after 3 days of reading slashdot the most I've ever gotten firefox* up to is about 90MB with 2 windows and 24 tabs open. Also, on a 'fresh' load of the identical 'saved in tabs' bookmarks firefox uses 12MB less RAM than opera. albeit opera is better at prolonged usage in terms of ram, since it rarely if ever goes past 50MB, while firefox can easily go to 60-90 MB
Bare firefox doesn't cut it, it's stripped to the bone compared to Opera's feature. My fox, the one I want to use and that makes me keep in instead of switching to opera, has something like 40 extensions. These hog a lot of memory, yet are what makes Firefox superior in my opinion. Bare firefox blows, it's still slower than opera and doesn't have a tenth of Opera's features.
point 3 Dubious claims... considering the entire interface of firefox is rendered by the gecko engine using java etc... perhaps on a slow computer, with low ram you could mamage to get 15x faster perfomance out of opera than out of gecko/firefox... but on the typical PC being sold in stores today the margin is going to be quite slim, between the two engines.
XUL is based on Javascript, not firefox, and I don't give a damn about what you think, the reality is that Opera is faster in 95% of the DOM operations, and has much better optimized loops than firefox (proof of that one being that reverse-counting in a for loop yields 50% improvement in looping speed for firefox, and just about nothing for Opera). Try these getElementsByClass emulations if you don't believe me.
i run firefox pretty well from a 'stock' configuration, no plugins, no extentions, just a browser. claiming that firefox 'easily consumes 200MB' is quite misleading, as only a firefox bloated down with dozens of 'feature extending' extenions will consume that much ram. hardly fair to blame the browser for the extentions bloated RAM use.
Yes I can, of course I can, extensions and extensibility are what allow firefox to be above Opera for most users, without extensions Firefox is little more than a standard-compliant IE, the only thing is has being the JS console (which Opera has) and the DOM inspector (which opera, to my knowledge, doesn't have)...
Of course they will, the engine is rougly the same (between mobile and desktop), the desktop is a fantastic marketting tool (the more it'll spread, the more people will be aware of the Opera brand), most Opera guys wouldn't accept Opera dropping the desktop version, and Opera 9 (codename Merlin) is in preparation already.
Profits never truely came from desktop anyway, which is why they're finally giving it for free: it can't hurt them, and it can help them a lot.
I had great hopes for Opera, so I'm the more bitter about how they, IMO, misprioritized development. In comparison, the FireFox team did everything right. It took a few years waiting for Mozilla to come around, but now it's here and it's solid, while Opera isn't even small or fast any longer. Too bad.
As much as I love Firefox, using it as my main browser and all, that has to be corrected.
Opera's installer is lighter than Firefox's
Opera takes about 20% of the memory a regular Firefox takes, and if you use firefox for a few hours on content-filled website you'll end with the fox hogging 200Mb of RAM while Opera will still be far under 50Mb
Opera's javascript engine is about 15-20 times faster than Gecko's
Standards support of Opera is comparable to that of Gecko.
Opera is still lighter than Firefox, and still faster, by a far margin.
Use Subversion for your versioning needs, TortoiseSVN (probably the main Windows Subversion client) is one nifty bitch, fully integrated to windows shell, a windows user won't even come close to unix behaviour.
If they specify ``Python'' as their language, then they are at Guido's whims as far as changes go
And as far as I know this hasn't deserved Python too much in the past, and you are allowed to mail Guido or talk to him on the MLs you know...
And given the fact that Lisp is probably one of the most powerful languages out there, "moving towards lisp" seems to be the common factor of each and every progressing language. As long as Python keeps being more readable than lisp I don't quite see the issue (yes I could code in Lisp, no I don't want to, polish notation, parens and braces burns my eyes)
I had been referring to py2exe (I don't know what you're referring to) going off of my memory, but I can't find any docs that actually say how it works, and don't care enough to be bothered to look them up.
Congratulation, you're a failure, py2exe doesn't compile shit it merely embeds both a Python interpreter and your software (along with the required libraries) into a single exe
The word compile there is still an accurate enough description of the process that turns the python source into the bytecode; one language is turned into another language. If you want to spend any more of your Saturday night going over semantics, here's a starting point:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compile. I'll leave you to it.
Wrong again, Python bytecode isn't the result of a compilation, it's the result of a translation and optionally the stripping of some comments. The only things that a.pyc file has over a.py one are
It's less readable
It takes less place
Other than that, it's exactly the same file, there is no optimization or structure modification from.py to.pyc, merely some name mangling to ease the interpreter's work (who can use raw.py anyway)
Doubtful. If you check out most of their work over at Channel 9, they're being quite arrogant about IE 7. They don't seem to want to be influenced by FireFox at all, and they seem to think that standards compliance should take a back seat to making IE "cooler".
This is wrong.
On so many levels it hurts.
While this was clearly the feeling one got when IE7 was announced, the IEblog posts have become much more humane (as if some upper exec had let the IEteam managed themselves instead of keeping them on a short leash), and there are quite a few posts on standards, the work the team does, asking for feedback and such.
They're proud of their work, of course they are, but I clearly don't see them as "arrogant", and while it looks like the standards were supposed to take the backseat, I guess that the community's backlash to the IEteam and the fact that other MS teams (the VS2005 one for example) started to work hand in hand with WASP made them fact-check and mend their copy.
I now say that I'm looking forward to IE7b2, because it may actually be a quite nice browser to web devs (won't make me get IE back as main browser, but well if I can stop wanting to claw my eyes out every time I check my pages in MSIE it's good enough for me).
About FAYT, I won't stand by your side, this is one of the features I love most in Firefox. Even though it sometimes get unstable (and steals edit box focus) it makes mouseless browsing much easier, and fast-finding a blast (FAYT + F3/SHIFT+F3 for next/prev).
There are already many extensions (TabMix, Reorder Tabs, Tabbrowser Preferences, Tabbrowser Extension) that allow you to reorder your tabs via drag&drop, and native support for this feature has been built in 1.5.
How 'bout paying a few more bucks for quality CDs/DVDs instead of buying the cheapest shit that has started decaying at a hellish pace before you even opened the shrink wrap?
I didn't say "the worst", I said "one of the worst" specifically because VB is much worse, and according to their current "practitioners" COBOL and FORTRAN are still a few steps ahead in horror (albeit not exactly for the same reasons)
Now, I don't consider PHP to be a "massive swiss army knife", I consider it to be a massive junkyard. Yes, you can find anything, often in 3 to 534 slightly different versions, all of them disgusting and not doing exactly what you'd need them to do anyway, and everything is mixed in a kind of big pile of turd (made of inexisting namespaces, incoherent namings and inexistant conventions)
They are reptiles, related to dinosaurs but not considered dinosaurs themselves, and have no close relationship to birds.
Birds-related dinosaurs were small theropods (bipedal carnivorous, Tyranosorus Rex and Velociraptor are theropods for example, but not from the line that led to birds)
If an equation involves Oracle, then anything will be cheaper, leaner, faster, stabler AND easier to use.
And in "faster" I of course mean faster out of the box, or with few DBAs, for Oracle is indeed faster when you have 5+ full time DBAs tweaking every little byte of it 24/7... good ones I mean, the Oracle zealots kind of DBAs
Uh, while having MySQL fit in is a bit tougher, Apache install is a pair of clics away and the configuration is exactly the same as Unix', and PHP installation is just about as easy...
Running Win98 on new computers is a bit iffy, but it is more lightweight and in some respects more bug-free than Win2k.
Whoa, considering Windows98 SE, against W2k Pro SP4, I don't even believe someone could output that kind of things, it's just so wrong it makes my eyes bleed..
W2k wastes W98 in everything but resources consumption...
Slashdot Mirror
I guess they can write freely as in their words aren't checked and they are not in prison before the publishing.
They can at least get their rants read before getting their ass pounded (which is why they get in both cases anyway) which is somewhat of a progress.
The thing is that Slashdot is now natively readable from within Lynx or Links (only with they put some kind of link on top of the page pointing to the content itself, having to go through 5 pages of menu before actually reaching the content is annoying)
Bullshit all the way, you can have a just as good markup in HTML4.01 Strict as you can have in XHTML 1.0 Strict (given the fact that they're, like, exactly the same thing but for XHTML1.0 being XML and HTML4.01 being SGML)
And XHTML actually isn't trivial given the fact that both CSS and Javascript behavioral changes can be noticed.
Not really, no
which is also available in Windows 2000 service packs 2 and above
whenever it happens to actually work (like... once in a blue moon or something)
Seriously, the only things that XP has above 2k are:
not firefox was of course supposed to be not Java, sorry about that.
Bare firefox doesn't cut it, it's stripped to the bone compared to Opera's feature. My fox, the one I want to use and that makes me keep in instead of switching to opera, has something like 40 extensions. These hog a lot of memory, yet are what makes Firefox superior in my opinion. Bare firefox blows, it's still slower than opera and doesn't have a tenth of Opera's features.
XUL is based on Javascript, not firefox, and I don't give a damn about what you think, the reality is that Opera is faster in 95% of the DOM operations, and has much better optimized loops than firefox (proof of that one being that reverse-counting in a for loop yields 50% improvement in looping speed for firefox, and just about nothing for Opera). Try these getElementsByClass emulations if you don't believe me.
Yes I can, of course I can, extensions and extensibility are what allow firefox to be above Opera for most users, without extensions Firefox is little more than a standard-compliant IE, the only thing is has being the JS console (which Opera has) and the DOM inspector (which opera, to my knowledge, doesn't have)...
Of course they will, the engine is rougly the same (between mobile and desktop), the desktop is a fantastic marketting tool (the more it'll spread, the more people will be aware of the Opera brand), most Opera guys wouldn't accept Opera dropping the desktop version, and Opera 9 (codename Merlin) is in preparation already.
Profits never truely came from desktop anyway, which is why they're finally giving it for free: it can't hurt them, and it can help them a lot.
As much as I love Firefox, using it as my main browser and all, that has to be corrected.
Opera is still lighter than Firefox, and still faster, by a far margin.
they make much more money from mobile opera than they ever made from desktop.
Use Subversion for your versioning needs, TortoiseSVN (probably the main Windows Subversion client) is one nifty bitch, fully integrated to windows shell, a windows user won't even come close to unix behaviour.
And as far as I know this hasn't deserved Python too much in the past, and you are allowed to mail Guido or talk to him on the MLs you know...
And given the fact that Lisp is probably one of the most powerful languages out there, "moving towards lisp" seems to be the common factor of each and every progressing language. As long as Python keeps being more readable than lisp I don't quite see the issue (yes I could code in Lisp, no I don't want to, polish notation, parens and braces burns my eyes)
Congratulation, you're a failure, py2exe doesn't compile shit it merely embeds both a Python interpreter and your software (along with the required libraries) into a single exe
Wrong again, Python bytecode isn't the result of a compilation, it's the result of a translation and optionally the stripping of some comments. The only things that a .pyc file has over a .py one are
Other than that, it's exactly the same file, there is no optimization or structure modification from .py to .pyc, merely some name mangling to ease the interpreter's work (who can use raw .py anyway)
Yep, for you can build underwear from lego brick, but you won't get lego bricks out of your underwear
This is wrong.
On so many levels it hurts.
While this was clearly the feeling one got when IE7 was announced, the IEblog posts have become much more humane (as if some upper exec had let the IEteam managed themselves instead of keeping them on a short leash), and there are quite a few posts on standards, the work the team does, asking for feedback and such.
They're proud of their work, of course they are, but I clearly don't see them as "arrogant", and while it looks like the standards were supposed to take the backseat, I guess that the community's backlash to the IEteam and the fact that other MS teams (the VS2005 one for example) started to work hand in hand with WASP made them fact-check and mend their copy.
I now say that I'm looking forward to IE7b2, because it may actually be a quite nice browser to web devs (won't make me get IE back as main browser, but well if I can stop wanting to claw my eyes out every time I check my pages in MSIE it's good enough for me).
About FAYT, I won't stand by your side, this is one of the features I love most in Firefox. Even though it sometimes get unstable (and steals edit box focus) it makes mouseless browsing much easier, and fast-finding a blast (FAYT + F3/SHIFT+F3 for next/prev).
There are already many extensions (TabMix, Reorder Tabs, Tabbrowser Preferences, Tabbrowser Extension) that allow you to reorder your tabs via drag&drop, and native support for this feature has been built in 1.5.
How 'bout paying a few more bucks for quality CDs/DVDs instead of buying the cheapest shit that has started decaying at a hellish pace before you even opened the shrink wrap?
Cheaper is not always cheaper in the end, cowboy
I didn't say "the worst", I said "one of the worst" specifically because VB is much worse, and according to their current "practitioners" COBOL and FORTRAN are still a few steps ahead in horror (albeit not exactly for the same reasons)
Now, I don't consider PHP to be a "massive swiss army knife", I consider it to be a massive junkyard. Yes, you can find anything, often in 3 to 534 slightly different versions, all of them disgusting and not doing exactly what you'd need them to do anyway, and everything is mixed in a kind of big pile of turd (made of inexisting namespaces, incoherent namings and inexistant conventions)
Hey, check that, an 18-meters wingspan irony whooshing above your head !
They are reptiles, related to dinosaurs but not considered dinosaurs themselves, and have no close relationship to birds.
Birds-related dinosaurs were small theropods (bipedal carnivorous, Tyranosorus Rex and Velociraptor are theropods for example, but not from the line that led to birds)
Except that PHP is one of the worst langages that has ever come into existence
If an equation involves Oracle, then anything will be cheaper, leaner, faster, stabler AND easier to use.
And in "faster" I of course mean faster out of the box, or with few DBAs, for Oracle is indeed faster when you have 5+ full time DBAs tweaking every little byte of it 24/7... good ones I mean, the Oracle zealots kind of DBAs
Uh, while having MySQL fit in is a bit tougher, Apache install is a pair of clics away and the configuration is exactly the same as Unix', and PHP installation is just about as easy...
Whoa, considering Windows98 SE, against W2k Pro SP4, I don't even believe someone could output that kind of things, it's just so wrong it makes my eyes bleed..
W2k wastes W98 in everything but resources consumption...
Nay, it's because "it's the industry's standard" mate