Then fancier moving ads came out (maybe some with bugs) and I found some used up most of my CPU cycles in firefox.
Nope, that's just Firefox.
Eventually I had to install AdBlock+ so I could be sure that I could have 40 tabs open without cripling the browser.
Did you miss the irony in posting an advertisement to an article about spam and advertisements?
But since you've started, I might as well advertise a superior competitor: Opera has built in, more featureful AdBlock, and it wouldn't have suffered the annoying slow down that made you install Firefox's AdBlock in the first place.
I've used both browsers on a whole bunch of machines, under a whole bunch of operating systems, and I've never seen Firefox out-perform Opera. Oddly enough, this comparison seems to agree with me. So I'd love to know what you're doing to have Firefox faster than Opera?
I actively chose Firefox because it has all of the features I use (I switched to Opera and it had no features on it that I used that Firefox lacked.
That may be true, but you can't deny that many of Firefox's more popular extensions are for things that Opera already has built-in. Adblock, Greasemonkey, and NoScript come to mind, but there are quite a few others.
was speed with Opera being slower then Firefox.
Oh come on. I really don't care why you chose Firefox, but you don't have to lie about it.
Therefore, the "development branch" of IE is far and away the most pathetic of the whole bunch.
Yep, which is why I didn't list it. IE doesn't matter because the people who use it simply don't care or are ignorant of other choices. Firefox users have actively choosen a web browser that lags behind in features.
While you are correct that the current release of FF does not pass the acid2 test, it is worth noting that the code to correct this is and achieve acid2 compliance is included in the current development branch of FF, and it will be operational in the next release.
The "development branch", the "alpha", the "beta" and the "release candidate" don't count. If you want to compare development branches, Opera, Konqueror, and Safari make Firefox look even more pathetic.
You don't have the right to interfere with my communications though. I rely on my cell phone as my only means of communication (no landline).
I'm sorry, but if you're that important, maybe you should stay home and rent a movie. That way, when some incredibly important shit happens, you can just hit pause. And surely somebody as important as yourself can afford a gigantic home theatre system anyway, so why go out? Or do you just like to ruin other people's attempts to have a good time?
What the fuck is so important that it can't wait two hours and makes you feel justified in ruining the night of a theatre full of people?
How about when are trying to force something open and your hand slips making you hit yourself in the face? Do you give your hand a look of betrayal like I do?
You are much to lenient with your extremeties. I suggest removing the limb immediately. Make your vengeance swift and unmerciful. The hand has openly defied you in the midst of its peers. It has opposed you once, and there is no telling how far it may go next time.
Think eggs in baskets, then you get the idea why we need to spread out.
I've never understood why people think like that.
Yeah, some day humans may be wiped out by war, disease, a comet or something else, but who cares? Life goes on, just not ours.
I'm not saying it's a waste of time to colonize other planets, or that it's not cool, but it seems kind of silly to think of doing it to save the population.
Last I knew, the GPL was not about whether you could toss in a binary blob with your distribution or make it available for download.
Section 3 of the GPL makes it pretty clear that to distrubute a piece of software under the GPL, the entire source code must be available: "For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable."
In other words, who really gives a shit if Shuttleworth includes binary/non-GPL code in [x|k|ed]ubuntu if the end result is more people being able to use it and being happy with it?
If nobody gave a shit about GPL compliance, this whole story wouldn't exist. Mark Shuttleworth in openSUSE forum:
"Novell's decision to go to great lengths to circumvent the patent framework clearly articulated in the GPL has sent shockwaves through the community. If you are an OpenSUSE developer who is concerned about the long term consequences of this pact, you may be interested in some of the events happening next week as part of the Ubuntu Open Week:"
So, Novell possibly skirting the GPL is bad, but Ubuntu possibly skirting the GPL is good?
What you don't realize is that this is the only way a linux distribution has a chance at competing with Windows. Shuttleworth is a (smart) businessman and knows this as well.
No, I realize that completely. Regardless, distributing binary drivers is in a grey area concerning GPL compliance. Which was my point originally. Shuttleworth/Ubuntu doesn't necessarily have the moral high ground when it comes to GPL adherence.
Also you contradict yourself. You say "OSS is about choice". News flash: Jumping ship is about choice. Mark Shuttleworth is reminding the openSUSE devs of one of the choices available to them.
So, let me get this straight. The openSUSE developers are smart enough to work on openSUSE, smart enough to be welcome to other distros, but too stupid to realize they can work on another distro if they want to?
Whatever OSS is about, Shuttleworth comes off as condescending. The openSUSE developers aren't idiots. If they're unhappy with Novell, they don't need to be reminded of their options.
Also, OSS is very much about attracting developers. Projects without developers don't go anywhere. Projects that have developers do, almost without regard to technical merit (cf. PHP)
Newsflash: Ubuntu is currently one of the most popular Linux distros around. They're not exactly hurting for developers. Certainly not enough to necessitate stealing developers from other distros.
With Ubuntu's questionable inclusion of non-GPL, "binary blob" and closed source drivers, maybe Shuttleworth should worry more about his own distro, and let the openSUSE developers worry about theirs.
Escuse me? I'd be a lot more worried about closed source software being in violation of Microsoft's patents than anything open source. Open source projects are usually pretty careful about this kind of thing.
Anyone can view the source, so if there are violations, the patent holder doesn't even have to get a court order to check.
Second, quite a few closed source companies feel threatened by open source software. It's cheaper, and the quality is usually "good enough", or better than closed soure alternatives. So companies with patents have incentive to bury open source projects in litigation.
And, like somebody else said, if they were serious, Microsoft would be suing. There's really no point in fucking around and making threats. But since there are no patent violations, they're just trying to scare people into thinking there might be.
Does the amount they contribute back exceed the amount they gain by benefiting from the work of others?
I understand why you listed Google and IBM. But why is Sun in your list?
If you hadn't heard, Sun just open sourced the entire Java compiler, virtual machine, and JIT compiler. That makes Java one of the most popular open source projects in the world. And then there's the tens of millions of lines of code for OpenSolaris. So far, Sun is the largest contributor to both of those.
I'd almost be willing to say Sun has released more open source code than any other company.
Am I the only person who hates advertisements? I don't want to see ads while I browse the internet. I don't want to see ads while I'm watching movies or TV. I don't want to hear ads on the radio. And I sure as hell don't want ads on my cell phone.
Charge me for your product or service, then leave me the fuck alone.
Hard, yes. Impossible, no. NASA have a huge budget, and enjoy the reputation of being the best and brightest. They've conquered problems of the most amazing difficulty. Not being able to fly because their systems can't cope with the year changing a digit sounds like a truly pathetic excuse in that context.
NASA's budget isn't infinite. They'd have to find all the affected code, change it, document it, then regression test everything. That would be incredibly expensive.
The alternative is to simply avoid December 31st and January 1st. That costs nothing, doesn't risk breaking code that works, and has worked for over 20 years.
It's just not worth changing everything for something that happens so infrequently.
Well, you can argue that a new stadium is an investment in the city. It can revitalize an area of town and attract new business.
Bullshit. I could say that about any building. "If you build this new Intel fab for us, it will revitalize the area and attract new businesses. It's an investment." Every other business is lucky if they get tax breaks when they build a new building. They sure as hell aren't paid for with tax dollars. Why should sports stadiums be any different?
Well, it's not as if they can ask their sound engineer and composer to write kernel patches is it, so they may as well earn their keep...
Are you being facetious? If they fired their composers and sound engineers, they could pay for a few more developers, security revieiwers, designers, or other people to help make the OS more secure.
The concern about sound also implies that somewhere up the management chain, some idiot is thinking "Man when are they going to get the sound done?" instead of "Are there any other security issues to take care of?"
I hope this gets more VS.Net developers porting over to Linux using Mono. Linux can really use more easy to use and easy to develop applications without having to learn kernel hacking and methods that exist only for Linux. This is a good thing and maybe the corporations will decide to have some Linux workstations if they can develop VB.Net applications for them the same way they develop them for Windows.
Wow. MS has you hook, line and sinker.
If I write an app in Python, Ruby, Perl, C or C++ and use Qt, Gtk, wxWidgets or Tk for the GUI, the app will usually run on Linux, *BSD, OS X, and Windows without modification. Same with Java and SWT or Swing. No legally questionable third party add-ins required. If VB.Net lusers want to write cross-platform apps, they shouldn't be using VB.
And kernel hacking is necessary under Linux in the exact same situations where it would be necessary under Windows. It's irrelevant in the context of application development.
I use it quite a bit. I can't tell the difference between MS's results and Google's results, and it's easier to get rid of the advertisements in MS's results.
Slashdot Mirror
Nope, that's just Firefox.
Did you miss the irony in posting an advertisement to an article about spam and advertisements?
But since you've started, I might as well advertise a superior competitor: Opera has built in, more featureful AdBlock, and it wouldn't have suffered the annoying slow down that made you install Firefox's AdBlock in the first place.
I've used both browsers on a whole bunch of machines, under a whole bunch of operating systems, and I've never seen Firefox out-perform Opera. Oddly enough, this comparison seems to agree with me. So I'd love to know what you're doing to have Firefox faster than Opera?
That may be true, but you can't deny that many of Firefox's more popular extensions are for things that Opera already has built-in. Adblock, Greasemonkey, and NoScript come to mind, but there are quite a few others.
Oh come on. I really don't care why you chose Firefox, but you don't have to lie about it.
Yep, which is why I didn't list it. IE doesn't matter because the people who use it simply don't care or are ignorant of other choices. Firefox users have actively choosen a web browser that lags behind in features.
The "development branch", the "alpha", the "beta" and the "release candidate" don't count. If you want to compare development branches, Opera, Konqueror, and Safari make Firefox look even more pathetic.
Give me a break. If you're that terrified for your children, stay home.
I'm sorry, but if you're that important, maybe you should stay home and rent a movie. That way, when some incredibly important shit happens, you can just hit pause. And surely somebody as important as yourself can afford a gigantic home theatre system anyway, so why go out? Or do you just like to ruin other people's attempts to have a good time?
What the fuck is so important that it can't wait two hours and makes you feel justified in ruining the night of a theatre full of people?
You are much to lenient with your extremeties. I suggest removing the limb immediately. Make your vengeance swift and unmerciful. The hand has openly defied you in the midst of its peers. It has opposed you once, and there is no telling how far it may go next time.
I've never understood why people think like that.
Yeah, some day humans may be wiped out by war, disease, a comet or something else, but who cares? Life goes on, just not ours.
I'm not saying it's a waste of time to colonize other planets, or that it's not cool, but it seems kind of silly to think of doing it to save the population.
Section 3 of the GPL makes it pretty clear that to distrubute a piece of software under the GPL, the entire source code must be available: "For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable."
If nobody gave a shit about GPL compliance, this whole story wouldn't exist. Mark Shuttleworth in openSUSE forum:
So, Novell possibly skirting the GPL is bad, but Ubuntu possibly skirting the GPL is good?
No, I realize that completely. Regardless, distributing binary drivers is in a grey area concerning GPL compliance. Which was my point originally. Shuttleworth/Ubuntu doesn't necessarily have the moral high ground when it comes to GPL adherence.
So, let me get this straight. The openSUSE developers are smart enough to work on openSUSE, smart enough to be welcome to other distros, but too stupid to realize they can work on another distro if they want to?
Whatever OSS is about, Shuttleworth comes off as condescending. The openSUSE developers aren't idiots. If they're unhappy with Novell, they don't need to be reminded of their options.
Newsflash: Ubuntu is currently one of the most popular Linux distros around. They're not exactly hurting for developers. Certainly not enough to necessitate stealing developers from other distros.
With Ubuntu's questionable inclusion of non-GPL, "binary blob" and closed source drivers, maybe Shuttleworth should worry more about his own distro, and let the openSUSE developers worry about theirs.
Escuse me? I'd be a lot more worried about closed source software being in violation of Microsoft's patents than anything open source. Open source projects are usually pretty careful about this kind of thing.
Anyone can view the source, so if there are violations, the patent holder doesn't even have to get a court order to check.
Second, quite a few closed source companies feel threatened by open source software. It's cheaper, and the quality is usually "good enough", or better than closed soure alternatives. So companies with patents have incentive to bury open source projects in litigation.
And, like somebody else said, if they were serious, Microsoft would be suing. There's really no point in fucking around and making threats. But since there are no patent violations, they're just trying to scare people into thinking there might be.
Actually, I like it the way it is right now. I'm sure the advertisements are there, but I never see them. And it's free.
But when it comes down to it, I'd rather pay a few bucks than have advertising shoved in my face.
Taking out the "AJAX", HTTPRequest, Javascript, Flash, Java and advertisements would be a nice start.
Also works with question marks.
I understand why you listed Google and IBM. But why is Sun in your list?
If you hadn't heard, Sun just open sourced the entire Java compiler, virtual machine, and JIT compiler. That makes Java one of the most popular open source projects in the world. And then there's the tens of millions of lines of code for OpenSolaris. So far, Sun is the largest contributor to both of those.
I'd almost be willing to say Sun has released more open source code than any other company.
Am I the only person who hates advertisements? I don't want to see ads while I browse the internet. I don't want to see ads while I'm watching movies or TV. I don't want to hear ads on the radio. And I sure as hell don't want ads on my cell phone.
Charge me for your product or service, then leave me the fuck alone.
NASA's budget isn't infinite. They'd have to find all the affected code, change it, document it, then regression test everything. That would be incredibly expensive.
The alternative is to simply avoid December 31st and January 1st. That costs nothing, doesn't risk breaking code that works, and has worked for over 20 years.
It's just not worth changing everything for something that happens so infrequently.
How is that controversial? All the other search engines do it.
Bullshit. I could say that about any building. "If you build this new Intel fab for us, it will revitalize the area and attract new businesses. It's an investment." Every other business is lucky if they get tax breaks when they build a new building. They sure as hell aren't paid for with tax dollars. Why should sports stadiums be any different?
Am I the only one who doesn't see what the problem is?
Are you being facetious? If they fired their composers and sound engineers, they could pay for a few more developers, security revieiwers, designers, or other people to help make the OS more secure.
The concern about sound also implies that somewhere up the management chain, some idiot is thinking "Man when are they going to get the sound done?" instead of "Are there any other security issues to take care of?"
Wow. MS has you hook, line and sinker.
If I write an app in Python, Ruby, Perl, C or C++ and use Qt, Gtk, wxWidgets or Tk for the GUI, the app will usually run on Linux, *BSD, OS X, and Windows without modification. Same with Java and SWT or Swing. No legally questionable third party add-ins required. If VB.Net lusers want to write cross-platform apps, they shouldn't be using VB.
And kernel hacking is necessary under Linux in the exact same situations where it would be necessary under Windows. It's irrelevant in the context of application development.
I use it quite a bit. I can't tell the difference between MS's results and Google's results, and it's easier to get rid of the advertisements in MS's results.