No, browsers nowadays are the least incompatible ever, and it becomes better year by year, when outdated IE versions drop off the considerable target lists. Getting rid of IE 6 was one of the greatest milestones of a decade, soon to be followed by IE 7 and IE 8.
What most of you fail to understand is the TCO. The hardware costs nothing in comparison to how little time they need for setup and maintenance. If one fails, big deal; get a new one and restore it from the backup and it's running with a few minutes of work. Need more capacity or redundancy? Just get another and it's running within minutes. Need more demanding mass storage and/or networking? Plug that into the convenient external PCIe bus (Thunderbolt). Basically lim(0) setup time there too.
I still run my own servers as dedicated co-located generic Linux boxes, but the setup still takes roughly a day; not hours or minutes. That time isn't billable and I schedule it to days I can't do anything productive. If something fails without warning and requires immediate action, it's a day subtracted from writing billable hours of code, which per se costs about the same as a Mac Mini Server. For the customers of mine who need dedicated units for one reason or another, the Mac Minis pay for themselves just in the initial setup work alone, and they can manage them by themselves, just like my mom is able to manage her MacBook with maybe a support call every few years, when she wants an opinion on a hardware upgrade or such.
After the Mac Mini servers got the i7 CPU's, none of my customers chose a Linux option when presented with the cost breakdown. From the software perspective, my code isn't picky about which Unix or unix-like it's running on. Almost anything goes, as long as the system dependencies are installed. OS X Server just happens to have all the system dependencies preinstalled in the shipping configuration as well as everything else they typically might need.
In a small or medium scale setup or a large scale setup of heterogenous systems, Linux is cheap only if time doesn't cost anything, or the comparison baseline is something even worse; Microsoft Windows or such. Linux-based setups may also be feasible for certain large scale installations of homogenous nodes.
I've always thought this is a poor comparison. You're copying data on over the network, not moving some physical objects that have the potential of a lot of storage. To copy stuff to the "tapes", you are restricted by the bandwidth of the read/write operations of said media. It's in most cases faster and cheaper per bandwidth to do the operation over a network.
How about making Seamonkey even faster and simpler by removing everything except the browser? Then replace the bloated Firefox with that, what could go wrong?
Desktop browsers should use the memory they have available rather than swap stuff to the disk. The mobile webkit browsers are fairly light-weight, won't usually need more than tens of MB's.
False. Check your facts before posting BS. The bundled display settings for retina modes range from 150% to 280% UI scaling. Only one, the default one uses 200% magnification. The scaling can be disabled, which is the way I prefer to use it, which means 100% scale, which is the same as the defaults on all older macs. In any case, 1px == 1px, except for old apps, which have no knowledge of high-res scaling modes. For those, a separate 200% virtual framebuffer is maintained, where the system translates every legacy-drawn pixel into a 2x2 pixel grid, which is then scaled to whatever scale the user has selected and finally merged with the actual framebuffer. Retina-savvyness doesn't typically require more than recompiling the app against current versions of the system frameworks.
Well, I'm writing this on my retina-macbook pro without any upscaling, 2880x1800 and perfectly readable. I've used a ViewSonic VP2290B with its 3840x2400 @ 22.2" resolution (a bit over 200ppi) for years in a similar fashion. I think upping resolution is the greatest thing ever, because I can fit so much more content on the display without wasting time on scrolling and zooming, and for reading full-screen documents, everything is as crisp, or crisper than printed media. However, I've needed eyeglasses since 7-8 years ago. I'll probably opt for a laser eye correction surgery some time in the future. The point is, however, that if you have trouble seeing stuff, get some glasses. It's not for just monitors, but traffic safety and such, because you'll upgrade the real world from SD to HD.
Why don't you fix your eyesight instead? People with normal vision or glasses shouldn't have any issues distinguishing content on any consumer displays.
Yep, products like that are bad for Linux. They made the general population see Linux as the cheapo toy operatiing system, that doesn't really work and doesn't really have any software.
I don't think the parent is trolling. This is practically the sorry state of Firefox, which would probably be something like version 4.6.7 using the old versioning system. WebKit has left Mozilla in the dust, maybe they should switch bandwagons and just release a Firefox-y application wrapper built on WebKit?
Well, I replaced the battery on my iPhone 4, the battery was a about $15 or so from DX and it took about 15 minutes of extra careful first-time work to replace. Now that I know the construction, it would take maybe a couple of minutes to do that again. Just remove the two exposed screws and slide off the back glass cover. Then remove the single screw holding the battery connector, pull out the connector, lift out the old battery. Assembly is simply the reverse.
Slashdot Mirror
No, browsers nowadays are the least incompatible ever, and it becomes better year by year, when outdated IE versions drop off the considerable target lists. Getting rid of IE 6 was one of the greatest milestones of a decade, soon to be followed by IE 7 and IE 8.
I use one of these and I'm happy with it, but there are plenty of different models available for various different uses.
What most of you fail to understand is the TCO. The hardware costs nothing in comparison to how little time they need for setup and maintenance. If one fails, big deal; get a new one and restore it from the backup and it's running with a few minutes of work. Need more capacity or redundancy? Just get another and it's running within minutes. Need more demanding mass storage and/or networking? Plug that into the convenient external PCIe bus (Thunderbolt). Basically lim(0) setup time there too.
I still run my own servers as dedicated co-located generic Linux boxes, but the setup still takes roughly a day; not hours or minutes. That time isn't billable and I schedule it to days I can't do anything productive. If something fails without warning and requires immediate action, it's a day subtracted from writing billable hours of code, which per se costs about the same as a Mac Mini Server. For the customers of mine who need dedicated units for one reason or another, the Mac Minis pay for themselves just in the initial setup work alone, and they can manage them by themselves, just like my mom is able to manage her MacBook with maybe a support call every few years, when she wants an opinion on a hardware upgrade or such.
After the Mac Mini servers got the i7 CPU's, none of my customers chose a Linux option when presented with the cost breakdown. From the software perspective, my code isn't picky about which Unix or unix-like it's running on. Almost anything goes, as long as the system dependencies are installed. OS X Server just happens to have all the system dependencies preinstalled in the shipping configuration as well as everything else they typically might need.
In a small or medium scale setup or a large scale setup of heterogenous systems, Linux is cheap only if time doesn't cost anything, or the comparison baseline is something even worse; Microsoft Windows or such. Linux-based setups may also be feasible for certain large scale installations of homogenous nodes.
They specifically allow OS X Server to be virtualized.
I've always thought this is a poor comparison. You're copying data on over the network, not moving some physical objects that have the potential of a lot of storage. To copy stuff to the "tapes", you are restricted by the bandwidth of the read/write operations of said media. It's in most cases faster and cheaper per bandwidth to do the operation over a network.
I used it back in the day. Even though 2.0 and 2.5 and 3.0 were great improvements, 1.0 was still a lot like the Photoshop as we know it today.
There is no VMWare player for OS X. Not free or any other kind. There is just VMWare Fusion, which is a different product.
In Soviet Russia, shelter raises you!
Yeah, or Firebird or something, kinda like Firefox it's replacing but would indicate speeds of flying, not crawling on the forest floor.
How about making Seamonkey even faster and simpler by removing everything except the browser? Then replace the bloated Firefox with that, what could go wrong?
Desktop browsers should use the memory they have available rather than swap stuff to the disk. The mobile webkit browsers are fairly light-weight, won't usually need more than tens of MB's.
What's the point of putting the most bloated browser on the lowest end devices? Seems like a dumb idea to me.
TFA compares with the 3GS, which had 300 hours standby.
It wasn't always so. They were nearly bankrupt at one stage and still managed to become one of the biggest companies ever.
False. Check your facts before posting BS.
The bundled display settings for retina modes range from 150% to 280% UI scaling. Only one, the default one uses 200% magnification.
The scaling can be disabled, which is the way I prefer to use it, which means 100% scale, which is the same as the defaults on all older macs.
In any case, 1px == 1px, except for old apps, which have no knowledge of high-res scaling modes. For those, a separate 200% virtual framebuffer is maintained, where the system translates every legacy-drawn pixel into a 2x2 pixel grid, which is then scaled to whatever scale the user has selected and finally merged with the actual framebuffer. Retina-savvyness doesn't typically require more than recompiling the app against current versions of the system frameworks.
Yes, mod parent up
Nope, I do play minecraft, however. Not much else, though.
Well, I'm writing this on my retina-macbook pro without any upscaling, 2880x1800 and perfectly readable. I've used a ViewSonic VP2290B with its 3840x2400 @ 22.2" resolution (a bit over 200ppi) for years in a similar fashion. I think upping resolution is the greatest thing ever, because I can fit so much more content on the display without wasting time on scrolling and zooming, and for reading full-screen documents, everything is as crisp, or crisper than printed media.
However, I've needed eyeglasses since 7-8 years ago. I'll probably opt for a laser eye correction surgery some time in the future. The point is, however, that if you have trouble seeing stuff, get some glasses. It's not for just monitors, but traffic safety and such, because you'll upgrade the real world from SD to HD.
Why don't you fix your eyesight instead? People with normal vision or glasses shouldn't have any issues distinguishing content on any consumer displays.
Yes, and it's a good thing for Linux that the general population has no idea it's built on Linux.
Yep, products like that are bad for Linux. They made the general population see Linux as the cheapo toy operatiing system, that doesn't really work and doesn't really have any software.
I don't think the parent is trolling. This is practically the sorry state of Firefox, which would probably be something like version 4.6.7 using the old versioning system. WebKit has left Mozilla in the dust, maybe they should switch bandwagons and just release a Firefox-y application wrapper built on WebKit?
..so when are they going to do it, like, for real?
Well, I replaced the battery on my iPhone 4, the battery was a about $15 or so from DX and it took about 15 minutes of extra careful first-time work to replace. Now that I know the construction, it would take maybe a couple of minutes to do that again. Just remove the two exposed screws and slide off the back glass cover. Then remove the single screw holding the battery connector, pull out the connector, lift out the old battery. Assembly is simply the reverse.
Yeah, and for the iPhones, he could use AirDisplay, which makes the device a "real" wireless display head.