I'm going to go out on a limb here, and suggest the wild-ass hypothesis that the second pie chart was created that way for the solitary purpose of getting a bajillion uber-geeks to buzz, buzz, buzz about Safari on Windows.
But that's just me.
I have to break it to you: your period is a bit premature. Come one, did you consider the hypothesis that the second pie chart was a playful joke that fell flat on the audience?
But the Windows world isn't like that. It's a cold, unforgiving place where nothing is sacred, users turn like rabid wolves on any company that makes even the smallest error, and no prisoners are taken.
The most amusing aspect of romanticizing the cold cruelty of the windows world is how none of it seems to be directed it Microsoft itself. Or, at least effectively directed at microsoft.
That aside, I think it's premature to pretend that we know the strategy of the Safari/Windows release at this point. True, Bill gates is afraid that Apple is trying to "fix the web" and neutralize IE as his lock-in tool, but couldn't there be more to Apple's strategy than that? Might this be a shakedown cycle for the core libraries on Windows for some other purpose? After all, Vista finally has the plumbing. A revival of the YellowBox? Or the introduction of some CoreAnimation-based web technology that would simultaneously allow for 1) a more dynamic iPhone SDK (look at the pins drop in the google maps demo) and 2) something to compete with flash. I guess these thoughts are inspired by the All Things Digital interview with Jobs and Gates. Steve seemed to be very interested in conquering rich clients that leveraged services from the cloud.
But if you're working on a project with 100% test coverage, you can afford to revert, can't you? It's the case where you have 0% test coverage that reverting is most dangerous, and on that end of the spectrum it really is your fault anyway.
I understand why you want to make that distinction, but there is at least some evidence that you're making a distinction that is not universally accepted. In particular,
In this article the term standard is used in the sense of a process for establishing a technical standard (ie, a document containing specifications) among competing entities.
The purpose of standards is to put out an open method that everyone uses and interoperates with.
I disagree. The purpose of standards is not to create something that everybody uses. Rather, it's to sufficiently document something such that anybody could use it. A diverse collection of competing standards is nothing new. If one standard becomes dominance, there are nice efficiencies that you get, but it's not the purpose of standards -- it's just the gravy.
Every time the Wii is discussed, someone cracks a joke about "playing with his Wii", and there's much giggling. Combined with the hand gestures that arise from the new controllers, it's all one big phallic joke.
And now it's "creaming" the competition. Lol. That's why.
The interface builder is a glorified ResEdit, comparable to the dialog box editor that has shipped with the Windows SDK since the beginning.
That is, hands-down, the most outrageously funny depiction of InterfaceBuilder that I have ever read. The great thing about InterfaceBuilder is that you're working with live instances of the objects that you're manipulating -- the very same objects that will be running in your resulting application after being unmarshalled from the NIB file. For example, as far back as the NeXTstep days, you could drag an object off the palette that represented a table view into a database, and this widget wasn't just a facade for the purposes of arranging it on your window: it had a live connection to the database through the EOF ORM layer, you could select rows, sort by columns, etc. To compare this toolset with a thin property-editor like ResEdit is pure comedic genius.
Cool, I hadn't heard of Quick Look. This same feature (plugins for file previews) existed in NeXTstep's Workspace Manager (its equivalent of the "finder"). It's nice to see yet another feature make it back into MacOS X.
Slashdot Mirror
Meh, that's not nearly as cool as Microsoft's Big Ass Table
I'm going to go out on a limb here, and suggest the wild-ass hypothesis that the second pie chart was created that way for the solitary purpose of getting a bajillion uber-geeks to buzz, buzz, buzz about Safari on Windows. But that's just me.
History would have been different if microsoft ended up owning the codecs on the market-leading portable music player.
Now I'm even more convinced that your period came early.
I have to break it to you: your period is a bit premature. Come one, did you consider the hypothesis that the second pie chart was a playful joke that fell flat on the audience?
The most amusing aspect of romanticizing the cold cruelty of the windows world is how none of it seems to be directed it Microsoft itself. Or, at least effectively directed at microsoft.
That aside, I think it's premature to pretend that we know the strategy of the Safari/Windows release at this point. True, Bill gates is afraid that Apple is trying to "fix the web" and neutralize IE as his lock-in tool, but couldn't there be more to Apple's strategy than that? Might this be a shakedown cycle for the core libraries on Windows for some other purpose? After all, Vista finally has the plumbing. A revival of the YellowBox? Or the introduction of some CoreAnimation-based web technology that would simultaneously allow for 1) a more dynamic iPhone SDK (look at the pins drop in the google maps demo) and 2) something to compete with flash. I guess these thoughts are inspired by the All Things Digital interview with Jobs and Gates. Steve seemed to be very interested in conquering rich clients that leveraged services from the cloud.
There could be something to that. (Very close to fake bill's greatest fear, by the way. :-)
But if you're working on a project with 100% test coverage, you can afford to revert, can't you? It's the case where you have 0% test coverage that reverting is most dangerous, and on that end of the spectrum it really is your fault anyway.
+1 Funny, if only I had mod points.
Damn...taken: orgas.ms. Oh well.
This strikes me as an expensive (but possibly effective) way to ensure that silverlight-based adverts get shoved in our faces.
In this article the term standard is used in the sense of a process for establishing a technical standard (ie, a document containing specifications) among competing entities.
I disagree. The purpose of standards is not to create something that everybody uses. Rather, it's to sufficiently document something such that anybody could use it. A diverse collection of competing standards is nothing new. If one standard becomes dominance, there are nice efficiencies that you get, but it's not the purpose of standards -- it's just the gravy.
There is a community of applied "scientists" with some interesting models, fwiw.
You can't be a cohesive clan of outsiders if you're a toady for the establishment.
You're only saying that because you're biased. I see arrogance in their email because I know the historical context.
Seems to me like he answered arrogance with arrogance.
Every time the Wii is discussed, someone cracks a joke about "playing with his Wii", and there's much giggling. Combined with the hand gestures that arise from the new controllers, it's all one big phallic joke. And now it's "creaming" the competition. Lol. That's why.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that his posture was meant to evoke another famous Foozilla.
That is, hands-down, the most outrageously funny depiction of InterfaceBuilder that I have ever read. The great thing about InterfaceBuilder is that you're working with live instances of the objects that you're manipulating -- the very same objects that will be running in your resulting application after being unmarshalled from the NIB file. For example, as far back as the NeXTstep days, you could drag an object off the palette that represented a table view into a database, and this widget wasn't just a facade for the purposes of arranging it on your window: it had a live connection to the database through the EOF ORM layer, you could select rows, sort by columns, etc. To compare this toolset with a thin property-editor like ResEdit is pure comedic genius.
Cool, I hadn't heard of Quick Look. This same feature (plugins for file previews) existed in NeXTstep's Workspace Manager (its equivalent of the "finder"). It's nice to see yet another feature make it back into MacOS X.
...then he went back to his buddies and said "I slipped her the banana, heh heh heh..."
Ooh, and the logo for that site is a planet...with a RING...coincidence? I think not!
...ESR.
"Well I think it looks like death." -- David St. Hubbins.